Keeaumoku Development Special District Permit Application

KEEAUMOKU DEVELOPMENT

ALA MOANA SPECIAL DISTRICT APPLICATION

RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM

AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT

805, 815, 819, 835, 903, 905, 915, and 919 KEEAUMOKU STREET

and 1519 LIONA STREET, ALA MOANA, O‘AHU, HAWAII

TAX MAP KEYS: (1) 2-3-18: 52-60, 74, 75, and 77

KEEAUMOKU DEVELOPMENT, LLC

835 KEEAUMOKU STREET, SUITE 203

HONOLULU, HAWAII 96814

R.M. TOWILL CORPORATION

2024 NORTH KING STREET, SUITE 200

HONOLULU, HAWAII 96819-3494

APRIL 2020

i

TABLE OF CONTENTSPAGE

1. INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................... 12. GENERAL INFORMATION ....................................................................................... 2

2.1. APPLICANT........................................................................................................... 22.2. LANDOWNER ....................................................................................................... 22.3. REVIEWING AGENCY ........................................................................................ 22.4. TAX MAP KEY ..................................................................................................... 22.5. AGENT ................................................................................................................... 22.6. LOCATION ............................................................................................................ 32.7. LOT AREA ............................................................................................................. 32.8. ZONING ................................................................................................................. 32.9. STATE LAND USE ............................................................................................... 32.10. DEVELOPMENT PLAN ........................................................................................ 3

2.11.SPECIAL DISTRICT .............................................................................................. 32.12. EXISTING USE...................................................................................................... 3

3. AFFIDAVIT ................................................................................................................... 34. BACKGROUND .......................................................................................................... 10

4.1. PROJECT SITE .................................................................................................... 104.2. SURROUNDING USES ....................................................................................... 10 4.3. HISTORY ............................................................................................................. 10

5. EXISTING CONDITION ........................................................................................... 116. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................. 117. INFRASTRUCTURE .................................................................................................. 14

7.1. WASTEWATER................................................................................................... 147.2. WATER ................................................................................................................ 16 7.3. DRAINAGE .......................................................................................................... 187.4. OTHER UTILITIES ............................................................................................. 24

8. TRAFFIC ................................................................................................................... 24 8.1. AREA ROADWAY SYSTEM ............................................................................. 258.2. TRAFFIC IMPACTS ............................................................................................ 27 8.3. RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................................... 28

Keeaumoku Development - Ala Moana Special District Permit

ii

8.4. CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................... 319. OTHER IMPACTS ...................................................................................................... 31

9.1. PUBLIC SERVICES ............................................................................................ 31 9.1.1. Solid Waste Disposal ................................................................................ 31 9.1.2. Fire ............................................................................................................ 32

9.1.3 Police......................................................................................................... 32 9.1.4. Schools ...................................................................................................... 329.2. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT ............................................................................. 33

9.2.1. Natural Land Forms .................................................................................. 33 9.2.2. Public Views ............................................................................................. 33

9.2.3. Natural Habitat 33 9.2.4. Historic Sites ............................................................................................ 34 9.2.5. Exceptional Trees ..................................................................................... 34 9.2.6. Parks and Recreation................................................................................ 3410. COMMUNITY INPUT ................................................................................................ 34 11. ARCHAEOLOGICAL ................................................................................................ 3612. JUSTIFICATION ........................................................................................................ 45

12.1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................. 45 12.1.1. Purpose & Intent of the TOD Plan (Section 1.1.) ..................................... 45 12.1.2. Transit-Oriented Development (Section 1.1.2.) ........................................ 46 12.1.3. Revitalization Priority Sites (Section 1.2.9.) ............................................ 4612.2. VISION & PRINCIPLES (Section 2) ................................................................... 47

12.2.1. Vision Statement (Section 2.1.) ................................................................ 47 12.2.2. Principles and Policies (Section 2.2) ........................................................ 48

12.3. DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK ...................................................................... 51 12.3.1. Land Use ................................................................................................... 51 12.3.2. Ala Moana TOD Special District (Section 3.2.2) ..................................... 55 12.3.3. TOD Precinct Subdistricts (Section 3.2.3) ................................................ 55 12.3.4. Land Use Distribution & Intensity (Section 3.2.5) ................................... 56 12.3.5. Circulation (Section 3.3) ........................................................................... 56 12.3.6. Open Space (Section 3.4) .......................................................................... 62 12.3.7. Urban Design (Section 3.5) ....................................................................... 66


iii

12.4. PUBLIC REALM IMPROVEMENT (Section 4) ................................................ 75 12.4.1. Concept (Section 4.1) ................................................................................ 75 12.4.2. Streetscape Concepts (Section 4.2) ........................................................... 75 12.4.3. Intersection Concepts (Section 4.3) .......................................................... 77 12.4.4. Station Connectivity Strategy (Section 4.4).............................................. 77

12.5. ZONING REGULATIONS (Section 5)................................................................ 77 12.5.1. TOD Special District (Section 5.1) ........................................................... 77 12.5.2. Zoning Districts & Use (Section 5.2) ....................................................... 78 12.5.3 Building Envelope Standards (Section 5.3) .............................................. 78 12.5.4. Parking Standards (Section 5.4) ................................................................ 80 12.5.5. On-Site Amenity Space Standards (Section 5.5) ...................................... 84 12.5.6. Community Benefits Bonus (Section 5.6) ................................................ 85 12.5.7. Architectural Character Guidelines (Section 5.6) ..................................... 92 12.5.8. Tall Building Guidelines (Section 5.9) ..................................................... 98

12.6 IMPLEMENTATION ......................................................................................... 100 13. PLANS ....................................................................................................................... 10014. PHOTOS ................................................................................................................. 100 15. BMX-3 COMMUNITY BUSINESS DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ............................................................................................................. 101 16. RESOLUTION NO. 19-224, CD1 ............................................................................ 10117. SEA LEVEL RISE ..................................................................................................... 108


iv

EXHIBITSPAGE

EXHIBIT 1 LOCATION AND ZONING MAP 4 EXHIBIT 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN LAND USE MAP 5 EXHIBIT 3 DEVELOPMENT PLAN PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE MAP 6 EXHIBIT 4 DEVELOPMENT PLAN SUPPLEMENTAL PUBLIC

INFRASTRUCTURE MAP 7 EXHIBIT 5 ALA MOANA TOD PROPOSED FAR ZONE MAP 8 EXHIBIT 6 ALA MOANA TOD PROPOSED BUILDING HEIGHT ZONE MAP 9

APPENDICES

APPENDIX I CONCEPTUAL PLANS

APPENDIX II AFFIDAVIT AND ALA MOANA/KAKAAKO NEIGHBORHOOD BOARD MINUTES

APPENDIX III PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT AND AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE

APPENDIX IV FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP AND TSUNAMI EVACUATION ZONE

APPENDIX V TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT

APPENDIX VI ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVENTORY SURVEY

APPENDIX VII SUN STUDY

APPENDIX VIII ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS & PUBLIC FISCAL ASSESSMENT

APPENDIX IX PRELIMINARY WIND STUDY

APPENDIX X PHOTOS

APPENDIX XI SEA LEVEL RISE


1

KEEAUMOKU DEVELOPMENT ALA MOANA SPECIAL DISTRICT PERMIT APPLICATION

RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT 805, 815, 819, 835, 903, 905, 915, AND 919 KEEAUMOKU STREET

AND 1519 LIONA STREET, ALA MOANA, O‘AHU, HAWAII Tax Map Keys: (1) 2-3-18: 52-60, 74, 75, and 77 1. INTRODUCTION The Applicant, Keeaumoku Development, LLC. (“KD”), proposes to construct an iconic and catalytic mixed-use project with condominium residences, affordable for sale condominium residences, ancillary common area uses and commercial development. The Keeaumoku Development ("Project") is located at 805, 815, 819, 835, 903, 905, 915, and 919 Keeaumoku Street and 1519 Liona Street (“Project Site”), located on the east side of Keeaumoku Street, between Rycroft Street and Liona Street. KD plans to develop the Project on twelve contiguous parcels of land totaling approximately 153,884 square feet (see attached location map) or 3.53 acres. Currently on the Project Site there are one to three-story commercial buildings with mostly surface parking. The Project will involve the demolition of the existing structures on the property and the development of two new residential condominium towers with a commercial component consisting of retail, eating and drinking establishments, offices and other commercial uses. The Project Site is a block from King Street and about 1,600 feet from the planned Ala Moana Transit Station and within the designated Transit Oriented Development (“TOD”) zone. The surrounding area includes, the HMSA Building, the Pagoda Hotel, Walmart/Sams Club, Walgreens, Don Quijote, and Ala Moana Center.

The property is zoned BMX-3 Community Business Mixed Use District by the Land Use Ordinance and under the proposed Ala Moana TOD Plan. The proposed residential condominium units and commercial uses are all permitted uses under the BMX-3 zoning. The Project Site has historically been used primarily for commercial retail, dining, and office spaces. The Project will include approximately 964 condominium residences, of that total, there will be 146 affordable condominium residences (97 required by Ordinance No. 18-10 (10%) and 49 affordable units (5% of the total number of units built as a community benefit) with ancillary common area uses and about 88,000 square feet of commercial uses (including retail, eating and drinking establishments, offices and other uses), and 1,571 parking stalls (Appendix I, Conceptual Plans). The Project will provide a total of approximately 43,353 square feet of open space including approximately 35,352 square feet that wraps around the Project Site, from the Rycroft Street driveway, along Rycroft Street, then along Keeaumoku Street to Liona Street and then along Liona Street to the Liona Street Driveway, which will be highlighted by an approximately 26,000 square foot useable park/plaza open space area at around the corner area of Keeaumoku Street and Rycroft


2

Street that will be open to the public. An additional roughly 8,001 square feet of open space is provided along the east property and a short section of Liona Street, for the total of approximately 43,353 square feet. A portion of this open space (roughly 6,909 square feet), along the east property line and a portion of the north property line fronting the parking garage will not be open to the public for security reasons. The Project is planned to have two 400-foot tall, 44-story towers. The Project received IPD-T Permit approval, on March 18, 2020, through Resolution No. 19-224, CD1 approving a conceptual plan for an IPD-T Project for the development of the Keeaumoku Development which will allow heights up to 400 feet (with 18 additional feet for mechanical equipment and enclosures) and up to a 7.0 floor area ratio (FAR), subject to certain conditions, including the provision of community benefits. The Project is situated within a six-minute walk to Ala Moana Center (the largest shopping mall in the State) and about four minutes from Walgreens, Walmart/Sam’s Club and numerous eateries along Keeaumoku Street. The Project is expected to help encourage the continued transformation of this portion of Keeaumoku Street from its existing primary commercial focus to a mixed use residential community as envisioned in establishing a BMX-3 Community Business Mixed Use District zoning and by the Ala Moana TOD Plan.

2. GENERAL INFORMATION 2.1. APPLICANT : Keeaumoku Development, LLC 835 Keeaumoku Street, Suite 203 Honolulu, Hawaii 96814 2.2. LANDOWNER : Keeaumoku Development, LLC 835 Keeaumoku Street, Suite 203 Honolulu, Hawaii 96814 2.3. REVIEWING AGENCY : Department of Planning & Permitting City and County of Honolulu 650 South King Street, 7th Floor Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 2.4. TAX MAP KEY : (1) 2-3-18: 52-60, 74, 75, and 77 2.5. AGENT : R.M. Towill Corporation

Keith Kurahashi, Principal Planner 2024 North King Street, Suite 200


3

Honolulu, Hawaii 96819-3494 (808) 842-1133

2.6. LOCATION : 805, 815, 819, 835, 903, 905, 915, and 919 Keeaumoku Street and 1519 Liona Street (Exhibit 1)

2.7. LOT AREA : 153,884 square feet (3.53 acres)

2.8. ZONING : BMX-3 Community Business Mixed Use

(Exhibit 1) 2.9. STATE LAND USE : Urban 2.10. DEVELOPMENT PLAN LAND USE MAP : District Commercial (Exhibit 2) PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE MAP : No Improvements affecting Project Site (Exhibit 3) SUPPLEMENTAL PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE MAP : No Improvements affecting Project Site (Exhibit 4) 2.11. SPECIAL DISTRICT : Ala Moana Special District Ala Moana Neighborhood Transit Oriented Development Plan; Proposed FAR Zone Map

(Exhibit 5), Proposed Building Height Zone Map (Exhibit 6)

2.12. EXISTING USE : Existing low-rise structures with retail, eating establishments, personal services, offices and other commercial spaces 3. AFFIDAVIT A notarized affidavit confirming that the adjoining property owners were sent written notification of the Project presentation, made to the Ala Moana/Kakaako Neighborhood Board No. 11 (Board) on October 23, 2018, is included in Appendix II. The Board did not take a position on the Project. Minutes for that Board meeting are included in Appendix II.

4

5

6

7

8

9


10

4. BACKGROUND 4.1. PROJECT SITE The Project Site is located in the Primary Urban Center (“PUC”) Development Plan Area of Honolulu, at 805, 815, 819, 835, 903, 905, 915, and 919 Keeaumoku Street and 1519 Liona Street. It is located in the Ala Moana Area and consists of 12 parcels. The Project Site is bounded by Rycroft Street (south), Keeaumoku Street (west), Liona Street (north) and to the east, the Sandalwood Condominium at 910 Ahana Street, the O‘ahu Apartments and other apartments at 1549 Liona Street. 4.2. SURROUNDING USES The Project Site is located across the street (Keeaumoku Street) from the HMSA Building on the west side of Keeaumoku Street and kitty corner from Walmart/Sam’s Club parking garage and four blocks from the Ala Moana Center. The greater surrounding area includes the Convention Center, Ala Moana Beach and Park, the Central YMCA, the Honolulu Fire Department Station 2, department stores, eating and drinking establishments, hotels and numerous low, mid and high-rise condominiums and office towers. 4.3. HISTORY Historically, the Project Site comprised of 12 contiguous tax map key parcels on Keeaumoku Street between Rycroft and Liona Streets that have been used primarily for commercial retail, office, and eating and drinking establishments in a series of older low-rise one- and two-story structures. The improvements were constructed from 1955 to 1974 and several of the structures have not been maintained and the entire Project Site is underutilized, given the current zoning and the Ala Moana TOD Plan, which encourages greater density and high rise development in order to create additional ridership for the planned Ala Moana Station site. Keeaumoku Street has not lived up to its potential as a mixed-use community with the BMX-3 Community Business Mixed Use zoning that has been in place for the last 30 years. The area between Kapiolani Boulevard and King Street has just one parcel located on the west side of Keeaumoku Street that has a mixed-use development with an apartment building fronting on Sheridan Street built in 1968 and a commercial space recently redeveloped on Keeaumoku Street near King Street. The remainder of this area is primarily low-rise commercial developments that have been aging, and in some cases, deteriorating with limited redevelopment. There are only a small number of newer mid-rise office buildings in this area.


11

5. EXISTING CONDITION The existing development on the 12 parcels includes low-rise structures with retail, eating establishments, offices and other commercial spaces. 6. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The Project is planned as an iconic and catalytic mixed-used development that will transform the Project Site from its dated low-rise structures to a modern, iconic design that will potentially spur further development along Keeaumoku Street, which has not lived up to its potential as a mixed-use community with the BMX-3 Community Business Mixed Use District zoning that has been in place for the last 30 years. The Project will involve the demolition of the existing structures on the property and the development of two new residential condominium towers with a commercial component consisting of retail, eating and drinking establishments, offices and other commercial uses. The Project will include approximately 964 condominium residences, of that total, there will be approximately 128 affordable condominium residences (97 required by Ordinance No. 18-10 (10%) and approximately 49 affordable units (5% of the total number of units built as a community benefit) with ancillary common area uses and about 88,000 square feet of commercial uses (including retail, eating and drinking establishments, offices and other uses), and 1,571 parking stalls (Appendix I, Conceptual Plans). The Project will provide a total of approximately 43,353 square feet of open space including approximately 35,352 square feet that wraps around the Project Site, from the Rycroft Street driveway, along Rycroft Street, then along Keeaumoku Street to Liona Street and then along Liona Street to the Liona Street Driveway, which will be highlighted by an approximately 26,000 square foot useable park/plaza open space area at around the corner area of Keeaumoku Street and Rycroft Street that will be open to the public. An additional roughly 8,001 square feet of open space is provided along the east property and a short section of Liona Street, for the total of approximately 43,353 square feet. A portion of this open space (roughly 6,909 square feet), along the east property line and a portion of the north property line fronting the parking garage will not be open to the public for security reasons. The Project is planned to have two 400-foot tall, 44-story towers. There are currently under-developed parcels along Keeaumoku Street that have the potential to provide a vibrant mixed-use community along Keeaumoku Street to support the Ala Moana Rail Station and provide much needed ridership. The Project would contribute to Keeaumoku Street’s transformation into a highly identifiable, high-density mixed-use corridor linking Kapiolani Boulevard with King and Beretania Streets. Located in close proximity to the planned Ala Moana Rail Station, and with the largest mall in the state, Ala Moana Center, located within a six-minute


12

walk about 1,600 feet away. The Project will anchor the north end of Keeaumoku Street with a project that is located 1,600 feet from the Ala Moana Station. Of the approximately 97 affordable condominium units (10%) required by Ordinance 18-10, approximately 49 units will be made available for sale to families earning at 100% AMI and 48 units at 120% AMI for a term of 30 years. The 49 affordable condominium units planned as a community benefit will be made available for sale to families earning at 120% AMI for a term of 30 years. The two 400-foot Project towers will be oriented in the mauka/makai direction as recommended in the Ala Moana TOD Plan. Ground Floor The ground floor will include a porte cochere and driveway off Rycroft Street. The driveway on Liona Street will provide access to a drop off and pick up area for residents of Tower A (using uber, taxi and lyft or being dropped off by relatives or friends) on the Project Site, the ground floor commercial parking lot and the residential and commercial loading zones. The Rycroft Street porte cochere will provide drop off and pick up for residents of Tower B using uber, taxi and lyft or being dropped off by relatives or friends. The Rycroft Street driveway will provide access to the residential parking the ground floor commercial parking lot and the residential and commercial loading zones. This driveway will also provide access to the porte cochere. The first floor will also include the residential lobbies, mailrooms, back of house spaces in support of the residential towers and commercial spaces on the west side of each Residential Tower and at the low-rise commercial building between the two towers. The HECO room will also be on the ground floor and will house electrical equipment including the electric transformer. Level 2 Level 2 will include commercial spaces through-out both towers and the low-rise commercial building and parking in the parking garage. Level 3 Level 3 will include the first level of market and affordable condominium units in both towers, commercial space in the low-rise commercial building and parking in the parking garage.


13

Level 4 Level 4 will include =market and affordable condominium units in both towers, commercial space in the low-rise commercial building and parking in the parking garage. Level 5 Level 5 will include market and affordable condominium units in both towers and parking in the parking garage. Level 6 Level 6 will include market and affordable condominium units in both towers and parking in the parking garage. Levels 7 through 11 Levels 7 through 11 will include market and affordable condominium units in the tower and parking in the parking garage. Level 12 Level 12 will include market and affordable condominium units in both towers and an amenity level above the parking garage. Planned amenities include a swimming pool, sundeck, tot lot, barbecue area, and other recreational services that may include a fitness center, yoga room, meeting space and cabanas. Levels 13 through 30 Levels 13 through 30 will include market and affordable condominium units in both towers. Levels 31 through 44 Levels 31 through 44 will include market condominium units in both towers. Hours of Operation The condominium units will operate 24/7 with staff and security available throughout the day and night. The street fronting retail stores and restaurants are expected to operate between 6:00 am and midnight depending on final uses and their provided services. The service/loading dock will be open and managed from 6:00 am to 6:00 pm, seven days per week.


14

Employees By the time it is operational, the Project is expected to generate about 320 direct full-time equivalent jobs on-site. 7. INFRASTRUCTURE The proposed development includes approximately 964 residential units and 88,000 square feet of commercial space. R.M. Towill Corporation has prepared a “Preliminary Engineering Report” (Appendix III) dated April 12, 2019 which provided the following information on infrastructure. Their correspondence with certain City agencies is also included in Appendix III. 7.1. WASTEWATER R.M. Towill Corporation has prepared a “Preliminary Engineering Report” (Appendix III) dated April 12, 2019 that discusses the existing and proposed sewer system.

Existing Conditions “Sewer flows from the project site along Liona Street, Keeaumoku Street and connects to the East-End Relief Sewer on Rycroft Street which connects to the Ala Moana Wastewater Pump Station which conveys sewer to the Sand Island Wastewater Treatment Plant. Existing sewer mains are located along Liona Street and Keeaumoku Street and vary in size from 8-inches to 12-inches in diameter. The East End Relief Sewer in Rycroft Street is 48-inches in diameter. There is one 8-inch sewer lateral and several 6-inch sewer laterals that convey wastewater from the project site to the existing 12-inch sewer main along Keeaumoku Street. See Appendix A, Figure 9 Existing Sewer System. Criteria and Methodology The sewer system will be designed in accordance with the City and County of Honolulu’s Department of Environmental Services, Wastewater System Design Standards (July 2017). The residential density used is for apartment units of 2.8 persons per unit and Business Mixed-Use-Community of 200 capita per acre.


15

Projected Wastewater Contributions The proposed development includes 964 residential units and 88,000 square feet of commercial space. The project will have a base sanitary flow or an average daily flow of approximately 217,226 gallons per day (gpd). The proposed project will result in an average dry weather flow of 0.3257 million gallons per day (mgd). The results of the preliminary sewer calculations are summarized in Table 7 on the following page. The anticipated plumbing fixture units will be analyzed during the design development phase to confirm the design flow.

TABLE 7 – SEWER DEMAND SUMMARY

Description Units Acres Capita

Gal/Capita/

Day

Avg. Dry Weather

Flow (mgd)

Peak Dry Weather

Flow (mgd)

WetWeather I/I

(mgd)

DesignFlow(mgd)

Retail, Restaurant, Commercial - 1.90 266 70

0.211 0.632 0.011 0.743

Residential 964 3.53 2,744 70 Total 0.211 0.632 0.011 0.732

Proposed Wastewater System The necessary sewer system improvements will be designed to accommodate the proposed development and are anticipated to include new sewer manholes, laterals and cleanouts. The proposed improvements will comply with the Wastewater Design Standards of the City and County of Honolulu. All sewer facilities within public roads will be dedicated to the City. The sewer flows should be equally distributed to the existing laterals that connect to the existing sewer main along Keeaumoku Street. See Appendix Figure 10 for Proposed Sewer System. Impacts and Mitigation A sewer connection permit application was approved by the City on July 10, 2018 for 1,245 new residential units and approximately 75,000 square feet of retail, restaurant, and grocery store space. The Civil Engineer has indicated that the current proposal for 946 new residential units and 88,000 square feet of retail, restaurant and office space will generate less sewer flows than the project contemplated at the time of the sewer connection permit. See Appendix C for Approved Sewer Connection Application.”


16

7.2. WATER R.M. Towill Corporation has prepared a “Preliminary Engineering Report” (Appendix III) dated April 12, 2019 that discusses the existing and proposed water system. “Existing Conditions The potable and fire protection water service are provided by the City and County of Honolulu, Board of Water Supply’s (BWS) Metro 180 system which provides service from Pearl City to East Honolulu. The estimated maximum water pressure (static) is 76 psi with residual pressures ranging between 44 psi and 51 psi. Existing water systems adjacent to the project site include 8-inch and 12-inch distribution mains along Keeaumoku Street and 8-inch mains along Rycroft Street and Liona Street. See Appendix A, Figure 11 for the Existing Water and Fire System. The site is presently served by eleven water meters. The average water use of the eleven water meters is approximately 31,000 gallons per day. Criteria and Methodology A potable water system will be designed in accordance with the Board of Water Supply (BWS) Water System Standards (2002). The design criteria for domestic water consumption is indicated in Table 100-18 of the Water System Standards and is shown below.


17

Proposed Water Demand The proposed development proposes 964 residential units and 88,000 square feet of commercial space. The project will have an average daily potable water demand of approximately 299,760 gallons per day (gpd). Preliminary peak flow of 624.5 gpm for domestic demand and 2,000 gpm for fire demand are anticipated with corresponding meter sizes of 6-inches and 8-inches, respectively. Fire flow requirements for fire hydrants are 2,000 gpm for a 2-hour duration with 250 feet maximum spacing. The irrigation demand has not been determined at this time. However, it is anticipated that irrigation will occur during non-peak hours. The proposed water demand for the proposed development is summarized in Table 6 below.

Table 6

Description Area (SF) Units

Usage(gal. per

unit)

Unit Average Daily Demand (gpd/1000 sf)

Avg. Daily Demand (gpd)

Retail, Restaurant, Commercial 88,000 120 10,560 High-Rise Residential 964 300 289,200 Total 299,760


18

Proposed Water System The necessary water system facilities will be installed to serve the development and are anticipated to include lateral connections to existing water mains, meters, valves, backflow prevention devices and fire hydrants for domestic and fire protection services. In addition, booster pumps will be required to provide adequate pressure for fire protection and domestic demand. Proposed connections for the high-rise/retail development will be located along Keeaumoku, Rycroft and Liona Streets near the proposed residential/commercial parking entrances and will include 6-inch and 8-inch waterlines for domestic and fire protection that will connect to the existing 8-inch main and 12-inch main in Keeaumoku Street and the 8-inch main in Rycroft Street and the 8-inch main in Liona Street. Separate water meters will be provided for the commercial uses. A new fire hydrant may be required to meet hydrant spacing requirements along Keeaumoku Street. See Appendix A, Figure 12 for Proposed Water and Fire System Proposed landscaped areas along Keeaumoku, Rycroft and Liona Streets adjacent to the proposed project will require permanent irrigation. The irrigation point of connection will be determined during the design phase. Impacts and Mitigation The existing water system is adequate to accommodate the potable demand for proposed development based on the BWS water availability request response letter dated August 1, 2018. Further coordination with Board of Water Supply will be required. The irrigation requirements will be determined during the design phase and additional coordination with BWS will be required to confirm water availability for the irrigation demand. The final decision on the availability of water will be confirmed when the building permit application is submitted for approval and Water System Facilities Charges are paid for by the applicant. See Appendix B for Comments on the Availability of Water for the Keeaumoku Development.” 7.3. DRAINAGE R.M. Towill Corporation has prepared a “Preliminary Engineering Report” (Appendix III) dated January 19, 2018 that discusses the flood hazard determination and the existing and proposed drainage system. The Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) and Tsunami Evacuation Zone Map are provided in Appendix IV.


19

“Flood Hazard Determination The project site is located in the Zone X based on the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), map number 15003C0362G, Panel 362 of 395 dated January 19, 2011. Zone X are areas determined to be outside the 500-year floodplain. See Appendix A, Figure 5 for FIRM Map.” Existing Runoff The existing on-site runoff generally flows towards the adjacent streets. Runoff along adjacent streets are conveyed to the City’s drainage system via concrete curb and gutter on Rycroft Street and Liona Street on to Keeaumoku Street which has a drainage piping and catch basins and does not enter into the project site. Runoff from the site flows to the west along Rycroft Street and Liona Street on to Keeaumoku Street and conveyed south through the existing drainage system and ultimately discharges into the Ala Wai Canal mauka of Ala Moana Boulevard. On-site drainage was analyzed in four drainage areas as shown in Appendix A Figure 6. Drainage area 1 (DA1) consists of a drainage area of approximately 18,396.28 square feet or 0.42 acres and primarily discharges onto Rycroft Street. Runoff enters the Keeaumoku Street drainage system at the catch basin at the Kanunu Street and Keeaumoku Street intersection. Drainage area 2 (DA2) consists of a drainage area of approximately 86,520 square feet or 1.99 acres and discharges onto Keeaumoku Street. Runoff enters the Keeaumoku Street drainage system at the catch basin mid-block near the McDonalds and at the Keeaumoku Street and Rycroft Street intersection. Drainage area 3 (DA3) consists of a drainage area of approximately 39,480 square feet or 0.91 acres and discharge onto Liona Street. Runoff enters the Keeaumoku Street drainage system by flowing along Keeaumoku Street to catch basins hear McDonalds. Drainage area 4 (DA4) consists of a drainage area of 9,487 square feet or 0.22 acres and discharges onto Rycroft Street. Runoff enters the Rycroft Street drainage system that heads east to Anaha Street. Runoff quantities were calculated for the 10-year 1-hour and a 50-year 1-hour storm events for each of the drainage areas. The results of the analysis are summarized in Table 1 below.

TABLE 1 - EXISTING RUNOFF QUANTITIES

Storm Event DrainageArea Q (cfs) C I (in./hr.) Corr.

Factor A (ac.)

10-yr, 1-hr

1 2.04 0.90 2.07 2.60 0.42 2 9.62 0.90 2.07 2.60 1.99 3 4.39 0.90 2.07 2.60 0.91 4 1.05 0.90 2.07 2.60 0.22

Total 17.11 50-yr, 1-hr 1 3.00 0.90 3.04 2.60 0.42


20

2 14.13 0.90 3.04 2.60 1.99 3 6.45 0.90 3.04 2.60 0.91 4 1.55 0.90 3.04 2.60 0.22

Total 25.13

Existing Drainage System Runoff from the site primarily discharges to one drainage system along Keeaumoku Street. The Keeaumoku Street drainage system consists of inlets, manholes, catch basins, and 18-inch culverts and ultimately discharges into the Ala Wai Canal. A portion of the makai parking lot discharges into the Rycroft drainage system near the eastern driveway. There is a drainage system to the east of the project site along Anaha Street that drains that portion of both Liona Street and Rycroft Street. See Appendix A, Figures 6 and 7 for Existing Drainage Areas and System. Criteria and Methodology The drainage system will be designed in accordance with the City and County of Honolulu’s Department of Planning and Permitting, Storm Drainage Standards (August 2017). Proposed Runoff The project will be designed to maintain existing drainage flow patterns, to the maximum extent practicable to minimize adverse impacts to adjacent and downstream improvements. The proposed project will be designed to direct storm water runoff away from the buildings and structures toward grassed and paved areas, adjacent streets, or directly to the City’s drainage system. Storm water runoff from the project will discharge to the City’s drainage systems and will be limited to pre-development runoff quantities. The project proposes new open space and green roofs which will reduce the amount of impervious area. The Keeaumoku Development proposes 25,250square feet of pervious Landscaped Area. In the proposed condition, runoff will be directed to the open area for treatment and discharge into the Keeaumoku Street drainage system. A portion of the runoff will be directed to the existing Rycroft Street drainage system. Runoff quantities for the project were calculated for the 10-year 1-hour and 50-year 1-hour storm events for each of the drainage areas. The results of the analysis are summarized in Table 2 below.


21

Proposed Drainage System

The drainage system for the proposed development will consist of roof downspouts, grassed swales, inlets, and underground pipes to capture and convey runoff to the existing Keeaumoku Street and Rycroft Street drainage systems. Although retention of increased runoff due to the proposed improvements will not be required the project will still use roof gardens and provide water quality treatment. Opportunities to reuse rainwater will also be explored during the design development phase.

Impacts and Mitigation Any increase in runoff from the site which could adversely impact downstream improvements will be mitigated by the reduction of on-site runoff through the use of grassed and landscaped open space where there once was pavement and buildings. There will be no increase in the 10-year 1-hour storm event so no retention is required, per the City and County of Honolulu’s Department of Planning and Permitting, Storm Drainage Standards (August 2017). The results of the analysis are summarized in Table 3 above. Water Quality The City & County of Honolulu recently adopted new guidelines related to storm water quality. The Rules Relating to Water Quality (2016), amended July 14, 2017, apply to all development and land disturbing activities within the City and County of Honolulu and establish minimum

TABLE 2 - PROPOSED RUNOFF QUANTITIES

Storm Event DrainageArea

Q(cfs) C I (in./hr.) Corr.

FactorA

(ac.)

10-yr, 1-hr 1 15.24 0.802 2.07 2.60 3.53 Total 15.24

50-yr, 1-hr 1 22.384 0.802 3.04 2.60 3.53 Total 22.38

TABLE 3 - NET INCREASE IN RUNOFF StormEvent Exist. Q (cfs) Prop. Q (cfs) Net Increase (cfs) Required

Volume (cf) 10-yr, 1-hr 17.11 15.24 -1.87 0.0050-yr, 1-hr 25.13 22.38 -2.75 0.00


22

requirements for the selection, design, implementation and maintenance of Best Management Practices (BMPs). Erosion and Sediment Control The proposed development is classified as a Category 5 project and will adhere to all requirements set forth in the applicable section for that classification. The requirements for Category 5 projects include:

• An Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP) must be prepared by an Engineer licensed

in the State of Hawaii; • An ESCP Coordinator must be designated and shall be responsible for implementing the

ESCP at the project site; • A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General/Individual Permit

Authorizing Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction shall be obtained from the Department of Health (DOH);

• Erosion Control BMPs; • Sediment Control BMPs; • Good Housekeeping BMPs; • Dewatering non-storm water • Hydrotesting water; • BMP inspections and form completion, pre-construction and once every seven days,

conducted by the ESCP Coordinator.

Post Construction

The proposed development is classified as a Priority A project and will adhere to all requirements set forth in the applicable section for that classification. The requirements for Priority A projects include:

Retain on-site as much of the Water Quality Volume (WQV) as feasible; Biofilter the remaining portion of the WQV that is not retained on-site as feasible; If infeasible to retain and/or biofilter the WQV, one of the following alternative

compliance measures is required: o Treat and discharge any portion of the WQV that is not retained on-site or

biofiltered; o Retain or biofilter at an off-site location the equivalent volume of the WQV that is

not retained on-site or biofiltered. Incorporate appropriate LID Site Design Strategies to the MEP; Incorporate Source Control BMPs to the MEP; A Storm Water Quality Strategic Plan shall be submitted with or as a part of the Master

Development Plan for Department review;


23

A Storm Water Quality Report shall be prepared by a Certified Water Pollution Preparer (CWPPP) and must be reviewed and approved prior to issuance of permits for development.

Low Impact Development An important aspect in modern day design is Low Impact Development or Low Impact Design (LID). LID is an approach sought out by planners, engineers and regulatory boards to reduce the environmental impacts from new development or redevelopment. LID aims at reducing the environmental footprint while maintaining or enhancing the owner/developer’s purpose and vision of the site. On the subject of water quality, there are two types of BMPs – Source Control and Treatment Control. Source Control is the practice of preventing storm water from contacting work areas, and preventing pollutants from contacting surfaces that come into contact with storm water. Source controls for this project may include the following:

• Landscape areas – all areas that do not consist of concrete or asphalt will consist of grass

and trees. • Automatic Irrigation Systems – landscape areas will have an automatic irrigation system • Storm drain inlets – signs and/or stencils will be placed directly adjacent to all inlets. • Loading Docks – loading areas will be paved with concrete and if necessary, an engineered

infiltration system will be installed. • Outdoor Trash Storage – Outdoor trash bins will be covered, on paved surfaces, and will

not be located near storm drains. • Parking Areas – pavement runoff will be directed towards vegetated/landscaped areas if

possible.

Treatment Control BMPs are engineered techniques designed to remove pollutants from storm water runoff prior to discharge to the storm drain system or receiving waters. Treatment Control BMPs may include methods such as retention, biofiltration and alternative compliance BMPs. Retention: Where applicable, runoff from rooftops or impervious surfaces will be conveyed to rain gardens and catchment basins. The proposed open space may be used to serve as an infiltration basin for storm water to be stored and filtered into the soil matrix. Runoff captured will be filtered and reused wherever possible.


24

Green Roofs: The residential towers will have roof gardens. No credit is being taken for these roof gardens as green roofs. Treatment Control BMPs Numeric Sizing Criteria Treatment Control BMPs are sized for either volume, flow, or demand, depending on the BMP. Preliminary calculations were performed to determine water quality volume and flow quantities. The results of the analysis are summarized in Table 4 and 5 below.

TABLE 4 - REQUIRED WATER QUALITY VOLUME V (cf) P %Impervious C A (ac.) 15,418 1.50 83.6 0.802 3.53

TABLE 5 - REQUIRED WATER QUALITY FLOW Q (cfs) C I (in./hr.) A (ac.) 1.70 0.802 0.40 3.53

“ 7.4. OTHER UTILITIES

There is existing infrastructure in Keeaumoku Street, Rycroft Street and Liona Street adjacent to the proposed project. Further coordination with Hawaiian Electric Company, Hawaiian Telcom and Spectrum by the Project electrical engineer will be required during the design phase to confirm electrical and communication service connections.

8. TRAFFIC The “Traffic Impact Report Keeaumoku Street Development” (TIR) prepared by Wilson Okamoto Corporation in October 2018 is summarized in this section and is included in its entirety in Appendix V. “The project site for the proposed Keeaumoku Street development is located adjacent to Keeaumoku Street in Honolulu on the island of Oahu (see Figure 1). The project site is bounded by Keeaumoku Street to the west, residential uses to the east, and commercial uses to the north and south. The project site is further identified as Tax Map Keys (TMKs): 2-3-018: parcels 052-060, 074, and 075. Primary access to the new development will be provided via driveways off Liona Street and Rycroft Street.”

• 958 multi-family residential units • ~ 60,500 sf of retail uses • ~21,500 sf of restaurant uses


25

(The Project now proposes approximately 964 multi-family residential units and 88,000 square feet of commercial. The Traffic consultant has indicated that the difference in unit count and total commercial use is de minimis and would not affect his report and conclusions) “With the proposed development, the existing driveways along Keeaumoku Street will be removed with access provided via new driveways along Liona Street and Rycroft Street. Parking will be provided at-grade for retail and commercial uses with internal connections provided to Liona Stet and Rycroft Street. Additional parking for residential uses will be provided in the upper levels with access provided via Rycroft Street. However, these areas will only have a connection to Rycroft Street and will not be internally connected to the at-grade parking area. Along Rycroft Street, the existing driveway near the southeast comer of the project site is expected to be replaced by a wider two-way driveway that provides access to the at-grade parking area, as well as a speed ramp leading to the upper level parking areas. In addition, there will be a new one-way (exiting) driveway located further west that will serve an additional porte-cochere that connects to the eastern driveway serving a pick-up/dropoff area. Along Liona Street, a new two-way driveway near the northeast comer of the project site is expected to provide access to at-grade parking while a pair of oneway driveways further west will serve a new porte-cochere serving a second pickup/drop-off area. The proposed development is expected to be completed and occupied by the Year 2024.” 8.1. AREA ROADWAY SYSTEM The following is the description of the Area Roadway System, as described in the TIR: “In the vicinity of the project site, Keeaumoku Street is a predominantly six lane, two-way collector roadway generally oriented in the north-south direction. North of the project site, Keeaumoku Street intersects South King Street. South King Street is a predominantly six-lane, one-way roadway generally oriented in the east west direction that serves as the eastbound component of a roadway couplet with South Beretania Street. At the signalized intersection with Keeaumoku Street, the eastbound approach is comprised of a shared left-tum and through lane, three through lanes, and a shared through and right-tum lane. At the intersection with South King Street, the northbound approach of Keeaumoku Street has two through lanes and an exclusive right-tum lane while the southbound approach has an exclusive left-tum lane and two through lanes. Near the northwest comer of the project site, Keeaumoku Street intersects Liona Street. At this unsignalized intersection, the northbound approach of Keeaumoku Street includes two through lanes and a shared through and right-tum lane, while the southbound approach has a shared left-tum and through lane and two through lanes. Liona Street is a two-lane, two-way roadway generally oriented in the east-west direction between Keeaumoku Street and Kaheka Street. At the intersection with Keeaumoku Street, the westbound approach on Liona Street includes an exclusive right-tum lane. It should be a noted that there is a sign at this approach indicating right-tum traffic movements only. The eastbound approach of this intersection is comprised of a driveway that serves adjacent commercial uses.


26

East of the intersection with Keeaumoku Street, Liona Street intersects Ahana Street. At this unsignalized T -intersection, the eastbound and westbound approaches on Liona Street have one lane that serves all allowable turning movements. The south leg of the intersection is comprised of Ahana Street, a two-lane, two-way roadway oriented in the north-south direction between Rycroft Street and Liona Street. The Ahana Street approach includes a stop-controlled lane that serves left and right-tum movements. Near the southwest comer of the project site, Keeaumoku Street intersects Rycroft Street. At this signalized intersection, the northbound and southbound approaches of Keeaumoku Street have a shared left-tum and through lane, a through lane, and a shared through and right-tum lane. Rycroft Street is a two-lane, two-way roadway generally oriented in the east-west direction between Pensacola Street and Kaheka Street. At the intersection with Keeaumoku Street, the eastbound approach has an exclusive left-tum lane and a shared through and right-tum lane, while the westbound approach has one lane that serves all traffic movements. South of the intersection with Rycroft Street, Keeaumoku Street intersects Kanunu Street. At this signalized intersection, the northbound and southbound approaches on Keeaumoku Street have an exclusive left-tum lane, two through lanes, and one shared through and right-tum lane. Kanunu Street is a predominantly two lane, two-way roadway generally oriented in the east-west direction between Keeaumoku Street and Kalakaua A venue. At the intersection with Keeaumoku Street, the westbound approach has a shared left-tum and through lane and an exclusive right-tum lane. The eastbound approach is comprised of a driveway for the adjacent Walmart and Sam's Club Warehouse. That approach includes a through lane and an exclusive right-tum lane. It should be noted that there are posted signs at this approach prohibiting left-tum movements from this driveway. West of the intersection with Keeaumoku Street, Rycroft Street intersects Sheridan Street At this signalized intersection, the eastbound approach on Rycroft Street has one lane that serves all traffic movements, while the westbound approach has an exclusive left-tum lane and a shared through and right-tum lane. Sheridan Street is a two-lane, two-way roadway generally oriented in the north-south direction between South King Street and Kapiolani Boulevard. At the intersection with Rycroft Street, the northbound and southbound approaches have one lane that serves all traffic movements. East of the intersection with Keeaumoku Street, Rycroft Street intersects Ahana Street. At this unsignalized T-intersection, the eastbound approach on Rycroft Street has a shared left-tum and through lane, while the westbound approach has a shared through and right-tum lane. The north leg of the intersection is comprised of Ahana Street. The Ahana Street approach includes one stop-controlled lane that serves all turning movements. Further east, Rycroft Street interests Kaheka Street. Kaheka Street is a predominantly two-lane, two-way roadway generally oriented in the north-south direction between Kapiolani Boulevard and South King Street but transitions to a one-way (northbound) roadway between South King


27

Street and Young Street. At this unsignalized intersection with Rycroft Street, the northbound approach includes one lane that serves left-tum and through movements while the southbound approach includes one lane that serves through and right-tum movements. The eastbound approach on Rycroft Street has one stop-controlled lane that serves left and right-tum movements. The westbound approach is comprised of driveways that serve an adjacent apartment complex.” 8.2. TRAFFIC IMPACTS Traffic conditions for the Year 2024 with the Project and conditions for the Year 2024 without the Project are summarized in Table 4:

Table 4: Existing and Projected Year 2024(Without and With Project) LOS Traffic Operating Conditions

Intersection Approach/ Critical Movement

AM PMExist Year 2024 Exist Year 2024

w/outProj

w/Proj

w/outProj

w/Proj

Keeaumoku St/ South King St

Eastbound B B B C C C Northbound B B B C C C Southbound B B B C C C

Keeaumoku St/ Liona St

Westbound B B B C C C Southbound (*LT) A B B C C C

Liona St/ Ahana St

Westbound (*LT) A A A A A A Northbound A A A A A A

Keeaumoku St/ Rycroft St

Eastbound B B B B B B Westbound B B B B B B Northbound A A A A B B Southbound A A B B B B

Keeaumoku St/ Kanunu St

Eastbound B B B B B B Westbound B B B B B B Northbound B B B B C C Southbound B B B B C C

Rycroft St/ Sheridan St

Eastbound A A A B B B Westbound A A A B B B Northbound A A A B B B


28

Southbound A A A A B B Rycroft St/ Ahana St

Eastbound (*LT) A A A A A A Southbound A A A B B B

Rycroft St/ Kaheka St

Eastbound B B B C C C Northbound (*LT) A A A A A A

*LT = Left-turn “Under Year 2024 with project conditions, traffic operations in the vicinity of the proposed Keeaumoku Street development are generally expected to remain similar to without project conditions. Along Keeaumoku Street, traffic operations within the study intersections are expected to continue operating at LOS "B" or better during the AM peak period and LOS"C" or better during the PM peak period. Along Ahana Street, the approaches at the intersections with Rycroft Street and Liona Street are expected to continue operating at LOS "A" during the AM peak period and LOS "B" or better the PM peak period. Traffic operations at the remaining study intersections are also expected to continue operating similar to without project conditions.” 8.3. RECOMMENDATIONS The following are the recommendations of the TIR: “Based on the analysis of the traffic data, the following are the recommendations of this study to be incorporated in the project design.

1. Maintain sufficient sight distance for motorists to safely enter and exit the project driveway. In particular, ensure that the proposed speed ramp at the new driveway off Rycroft Street has sufficient sight distance to vehicles traveling along the adjacent roadway and vehicles accessing the at-grade parking area.

2. Provide adequate on-site loading and off-loading service areas and prohibit off-site

loading operations. 3. Provide adequate tum-around area for service, delivery, and refuse collection vehicles

to maneuver on the project site to avoid vehicle-reversing maneuvers onto public roadways.

4. Provide sufficient turning radii at all project driveways to avoid or minimize vehicle

encroachments to oncoming traffic lanes. 5. If access at the entrance to the parking garage is controlled, provide sufficient storage

for entering vehicles at the parking area access controls (i.e., automatic gate, etc.) to ensure that queues do not extend onto the adjacent public roadways.


29

6. Restrict on-street parking along Keeaumoku Street fronting the project site to facilitate the movement of northbound through traffic along that roadway.

7. Restrict on-street parking along Rycroft Street along the project frontage to

accommodate the proposed project driveways and ensure adequate sight distance for entering and exiting vehicles.

8. Maintain the existing on-street parking restriction along Liona Street along the project

frontage to accommodate the proposed project driveways and ensure adequate sight distance for entering and exiting vehicles.

9. Restrict traffic accessing the proposed driveway along Rycroft Street near the

southeast comer of the project to enter/exit traffic along the speed ramp and entering traffic only along the at-grade parking area to eliminate conflicts between exiting vehicles. Vehicles exiting the at-grade parking via Rycroft Street should pass through the porte-cochere and utilize the one-way exit driveway along Rycroft Street.

10. Restrict movements for the exiting driveway serving the porte-cochere along Rycroft

Street to right-turn-out movements only due to the close proximity of the intersection with Keeaumoku Street. Provide adequate channelization to direct vehicular movements exiting the driveway.

11. Restrict movements at the proposed porte-cocheres off Liona Street to right-turn in

right-tum out movements only due to the close proximity of the intersection with Keeaumoku Street. Provide adequate channelization to direct vehicular movements exiting the driveway.

12. Provide adequate turning and passing areas within the proposed porte-cocheres along

Rycroft Street and Liona Street to accommodate all anticipated vehicle types (i.e., limos, vans, etc.) and minimize queueing unto the adjacent public roadways.

13. Provide on-site delineation at the Rycroft Street driveway between the lanes leading

to/from the speed ramp and the lane leading to the at-grade parking area minimize driver confusion at this driveway.

14. Provide pedestrian connections between the project site and the adjacent public

roadways in locations that facilitate pedestrian movement to the existing pedestrian facilities and minimize unprotected midblock crossings.

15. Maintain the existing pedestrian facilities fronting the project site along Keeaumoku

Street, Liona Street, and Rycroft Street. Pedestrian facilities should be made accessible in conformance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).


30

16. Provide improved bicycle facilities within the project boundaries including designated and secured bicycle parking to encourage the use of alternate modes of travel. Connections to/from the bicycle parking areas within the project site should be designed to ensure convenient and safe pedestrian and bicyclist access.

17. Coordinate with Bikeshare Hawaii whether it is feasible to implement bike share

docking stations in the project vicinity. 18. Prepare a Traffic Management Plan (TMP) for the development which includes traffic

circulation, parking, loading, and traffic demand management strategies.”

Typical TDM measures: 1. Installation of convenient on-site bike racks. 2. Creation of bicycle amenities such as storage, repair facilities, etc. 3. Other incentives to encourage bike use. 4. Convenient pedestrian connections between project and other uses. 5. Other incentives to encourage pedestrian travel mode that are safe and convenient. 6. Convenient and safe passageways/routes to/from bus stops/transit stations. 7. Other incentives to encourage bus/transit use. 8. Scheduled and/or managed delivery areas to off peak traffic periods. 9. Personnel to manage/control porte cocheres to eliminate or minimize vehicular

queuing onto public roadways. 10. Unbundled parking to reduce vehicle needs. 11. Staggered work shifts for retail employees. 12. Encourage Carpool for employees/residents. 13. On-site project only car share services. 14. Designated uber/lyft ride hire and taxi pickup/drop-off area located off public

roadways. 15. On-site project only bike share services or nearby public bike share stations. The objectives of TDM measures are generally to reduce traffic demands on the surrounding roads, or to manage such demand to occur during off peak periods of traffic. These measures generally include actions to increase multi-modal travel such as bike, pedestrian, or transit, thereby reducing vehicular traffic on the roads. Other measures spread vehicular demands to other times of the day when ambient traffic demands are lower, through scheduling or management actions - lessoning the vehicular traffic demands on the roadways during various times of the day. In general and as noted, all of these actions are geared to improving the traffic conditions on the surrounding roadways.

The Applicant will review these recommendations and implement the traffic mitigations required by the DPP prior to the opening and use of the Project.


31

8.4. CONCLUSION The following provides the conclusion of the TIR: “The project site for the proposed Keeaumoku Street development currently houses a variety of office, commercial, and restaurant uses. The proposed project is expected to be completed by Year 2024 and entails the replacement of the existing uses with a new mixed use development that will include residential, commercial/retail, and restaurant uses. With the implementation of the aforementioned recommendations, traffic operations with the proposed Keeaumoku Street development are expected to remain similar to without project conditions. Although traffic operations with the proposed Keeaumoku Street development are expected to remain similar to without project conditions, the proposed project is located in a well-developed commercial area with an existing high volume of pedestrian and vehicular traffic. In addition, several new mixed-use developments are also planned in the vicinity of the proposed project. With the completion of these projects and the inclusion of residential uses in the vicinity, increased interaction between adjacent uses is anticipated that could significantly change the multi modal characteristics of the neighborhood. As such, the preparation of a Traffic Management Plan (TMP) is recommended to further minimize the impact of the proposed project on the surrounding roadway network.” 9. OTHER IMPACTS 9.1. PUBLIC SERVICES

9.1.1. Solid Waste Disposal

Solid waste collection for residences is provided on O‘ahu by the CCH Department of Environmental Services. Commercial enterprises hire solid waste collection firms to pick up and transport their solid waste. The primary landfill on O‘ahu is the Waim nalo Gulch Sanitary Landfill (WGSL), which is west of the bikeway in N n kuli. The WGSL is the CCH’s sole municipal solid waste landfill. A high percentage of solid waste is incinerated at the CCH’s H-POWER waste-to-energy facility. Construction debris is handled by PVT landfill, the only landfill on the island that accepts such waste. The solid waste generated by the proposed development will be collected by a private firm and will not impact municipal refuse services. KD will consider recycling the construction waste generated by the demolition of the structures on the Project Site. The demolition contractor will be directed to contact the various companies that offer their services in recycling metals and other construction wastes and will direct their use of one of these companies subject to availability of services.


32

9.1.2. Fire

The Honolulu Fire Station No. 2, at 1610 Makaloa Street, is located approximately 2,000 feet away from the Project Site. The close proximity ensures a short response time for fire protection and emergency medical services.

9.1.3. Police

The nearest police station is the main station located at 801 South Beretania Street, about 1 mile away. No expected increase in demands to police protective service is expected resulting from the Project. 9.1.4. Schools The Project is planned to include approximately 964 residential condominium units. The Project is located in the McKinley Complex Area. The students residing on the Project Site and who elect to attend public schools would attend Kaahumanu Elementary School, Washington Middle School and McKinley High School. Based on the State DOE estimates for calculating the demand for student services for the Project, the projected approximately 964 residences would add to the student population as follows:

1. Elementary (Kindergarten to 5th Grade) – 58 students 2. Middle (6th to 8th Grades) - 29 students 3. High (9th to 12th Grades) - 29 students The following table provides the capacity, the actual 2017/2018 student enrollment, and

the projected enrollment for 2022-2023: Student Population Actual Projected Enrollment Enrollment School Capacity 2017-2018 2022-2023 Kaahumanu Elementary 750 511 511 Washington Middle 1,021 801 626 McKinley High 1,695 1,583 1,633 The Applicant has determined that the student population generated by the Project at the

completion date and beyond through 2023 will easily be accommodated by all three schools. The 58 students generated by the Project for the elementary school and the 29 students generated for both the middle and high schools will not tax the three school campuses. Even with development planned elsewhere along the rail line and in Kakaako,


33

given the expected student generation in 2022-2023, the four schools will be able to handle the following number of apartment/condominium units:

Elementary - 3,983 units Middle - 13,166 units High - 2,066 units

9.2. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT 9.2.1. Natural Land Forms The Project Site is on a relatively level urban lot developed with existing structures, parking, and very limited landscaping. The Project Site does not contain any natural land forms or unique topographic features. 9.2.2. Public Views

Development on the Project Site will affect public views, including pedestrian views along Keeaumoku Street, Rycroft Street, and Liona Street and the nearest public view point area which is the open space/park at the intersection of South King Street and Keeaumoku Street located approximately 380 feet north from the Project Site. However, pedestrians have a cone of vision that for structures viewed from across the street, only about the first four stories would be comfortably visible. Walking along a street fronting this Project, the pedestrian cone of vision would not see the upper floors of the Project. Views of the Project Site from the open space/park at South King Street and Keeaumoku Street are presently affected by two story structures on the makai side of King Street. The towers and podium will be visible from the open/space park.

9.2.3. Natural Habitats

9.2.3.1. Flora Vegetation on the Project Site is minimal and contained in landscape areas along Keeaumoku Street, Rycroft Street, and Liona Street. Sparse amounts of landscaping are within the yard areas and within certain parking lots. There is on large canopy tree in parking lot off Liona Street. There are six street trees (Shower Trees) in the City’s right-of-way along Keeaumoku Street. There are six palm trees within the existing Project yard area along Rycroft Street. There are no trees along Liona Street in the City’s right-of-way or the Project’s yard area.


34

Because the Project Site has been urbanized for many years, native endangered or threatened species are not expected to naturally occur in this environment. 9.2.3.2. Fauna Native land and water birds are not expected to be found at this Project site or at the surrounding properties because the area lacks any suitable habitat that could support these types of animals. The street trees within the City right-of-way could support nesting for birds, but the Project development will not affect these trees.

9.2.4. Historic Sites

Most of the one-story to three-story structures on the Project site were built between1954 and 1974. Although most of the buildings are over 50 years in age, none of the buildings are on the Federal or State Historic Registers.

9.2.5. Exceptional Trees

There are no exceptional trees on the Project Site.

9.2.6. Parks and Recreation As indicated in the plans provided in Appendix I, KD plans to provide recreational

amenities on the ground floor (open space park/plaza) and the roof deck, including a recreation deck with a swimming pool.

The primary recreational opportunities located near the Project Site are the open space/park

at the intersection of South King Street and Keeaumoku Street located approximately 380 feet north from the Project Site and about a half mile away is the Ala Moana Beach and Park.

. The Project will meet park dedication requirements by dedicating open space and

recreational amenities on the property and providing in-lieu fees if necessary. 10. COMMUNITY INPUT

ALA MOANA/KAKAAKO NEIGHBORHOOD BOARD

A presentation of the KD Keeaumoku Development was made to the Ala Moana/Kakaako Neighborhood Board No. 11 (“Board”) on October 23, 2018. The Board did not take a position on the Project. Minutes for that Board meeting are provided in Appendix II. The following are the comments/questions raised after the presentation:


35

“Chung was concerned about parking. Kurahashi added that when the Rail goes in, there would be less of a need for parking. They are already planning for the ultimate reduction for parking. Now, they are close to the required number of spaces for parking. Comments followed: Department of Planning and Permitting (DPP) wants less parking spaces. Mariano was concerned about sewer capacity. Cloutier mentioned increased people and noise. Another resident of the Sandalwood commented on traffic. Renee Espiau noted that Department of Planning and Permitting (DPP) wanted the Ala Moana Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) more on Kapi olani Boulevard than on Ke eaumoku Street, but will watch this project closely. DPP likes the direction of less parking, more open spaces, and more walking. Chung suggested having no parking stalls, except for disabled people.”

….. “NEW BUSINESS Consider resolution regarding Ala Moana Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Plan Amendments – Chair Tam decided to take the resolutions out of order. Kurahashi explained that they plan to present the amendment to the City Council by November 2018 to get the 400-foot height increase. Chung was still concerned about his no parking suggestion. Kurahashi added that his son lives in Chicago and he does not own a car, as the transportation system is working well. In Hawai i, until the Rail system is working, he would not be able to sell the units without parking stalls. Kurahashi suggested that he needed the 400-foot amendment. Chair Tam disclosed that he would abstain from the vote. Chang moved and Cloutier seconded that the Ala Moana/Kaka ako Neighborhood Board No. 11 does not support the Ala Moana Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Plan amendments. Discussion followed. Instead of using a double negative, Ammons moved and Chung seconded to amend the resolution to read that the Ala Moana/Kaka ako Neighborhood Board No. 11 supports the Ala Moana Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Plan amendments. The amended motion was ADOPTED, 7-0-1 (AYE: Ammons, Chang, Chung, Cloutier, Mariano, and Oppie; NAY: None; ABSTAIN: Ryan Tam). The amended motion that the Ala Moana/Kaka ako Neighborhood Board No. 11 supports the Ala Moana Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Plan amendments was NOT ADOPTED, 3-4-1 (AYE: Ammons, Chung, and Komine; NAY: Chang, Cloutier, Mariano, and Oppie; ABSTAIN: Tam). No action was taken. Consider resolution regarding the Ke eaumoku Development – Chair Tam noted that as the application has not been filed yet, this item would be placed on the next agenda.”


36

11. ARCHAEOLOGICAL A “Draft Archaeological Inventory Survey Report for the Ke’eaumoku Development Project” (“Report”) was prepared for the Project by Cultural Surveys, Hawaii (“CSH”), dated March 2019. The full Report is provided in Appendix VI. The following are excerpts from the Report:

“1.3.2 Built Environment

The project area is located within east/central Honolulu in a modern urban area surrounded by buildings, streets, sidewalks, and utility infrastructure. More specifically, development around the project area includes the Ala Moana Shopping Center to the southwest, the Sam’s Club/Wal-Mart complex to the northwest, and many restaurants, shops, and businesses around the immediate vicinity (see Figure 3). The project area is within the Keeaumoku International Village complex consisting of a variety of businesses including a supermarket, restaurant eateries, a pool hall, and a salon. The complex contains one- to two-story buildings with associated asphalt parking lots.”

…..

3.2.1 Pre-Contact and Early Historic Periods

The ‘ili of K lia is an area of the broad plain that, in traditional Hawaiian times, separated the more populated and cultivated centers of Kou (present-day Honolulu) and Waik k . In Waik k , a system of irrigated taro lo‘i (irrigated fields) fed by streams descending from Makiki, M noa, and P lolo valleys blanketed the plain, and networks of fishponds dotted the shoreline. Similarly, Kou—the area of downtown Honolulu surrounding the harbor—possessed shoreward fishponds and irrigated fields watered by ample streams descending from Nu‘uanu and Pauoa valleys. The pre-Contact population and land use patterns may have derived from its relationship to these two densely populated areas to the west and east. Thus, an attempt to reconstruct the region around the current project area as it existed for the Hawaiians during the centuries before Western Contact and modern urbanization must begin with accounts of Kou and Waik k .

…..3.2.6 Development in the 1880s and 1890s

Maps of the 1880s and 1890s (see Figure 10, Figure 11, Figure 13, Figure 17, and Figure 18) record an “arm” of streets projecting from downtown Honolulu into the mauka portion of the plain of Waik k along King and Beretania streets. A large portion of west K lia and Waik k , however, remained open and the maps reveal that much of the region had become rice fields, while other areas were designated as marsh lands.


37

3.2.7 Disease

Honolulu was exposed to a wide variety of deadly diseases in the nineteenth century with great loss of life particularly amongst the Native Hawaiian population that had little immunity to these diseases. Disease hospitals were generally established outside the core area of growing Honolulu and often those who died in these epidemics were buried near the hospitals. For example, in 1881, a branch leprosy hospital or receiving station for cases of Hansen’s Disease was opened in Kaka‘ako, in a block now bound by Ala Moana, Auahi, Coral, and Keawe streets (west of the project area) (Griffin et al. 1987:55). Thrum reports victims of the cholera epidemic of 1895 were treated at the Kaka‘ako Hospital, so the buildings must have remained or been rebuilt (Thrum 1896:101). In the Kaka‘ako area during the 1853 smallpox epidemic patients were isolated at a temporary quarantine camp, and a hospital was set up (Thrum 1896:98). Victims of the disease were buried at the Honuakaha Cemetery near the modern junction of Quinn Lane and South Street (Griffin et al. 1987:13). This pattern is noted in the context of Little Britain where we are told there was “a small hospital” (Forbes 1992:137). The presence of a small hospital, which may have been established during the 1853 smallpox epidemic, suggests a possible elevated potential for human skeletal remains in the vicinity. 3.2.8 1900s

3.2.8.1 Salt Making into the Twentieth Century The export of salt declined in the late nineteenth century. Thrum states the apex of the trade was in 1870, but by 1883 (Thrum 1923:116), he noted that “pulu, salt and oil have disappeared entirely” from the list of yearly exports (Thrum 1883:68). Salt continued to be manufactured for local use. By 1916, only one salt works, the Honolulu Salt Company, was still in operation. A 1902 photograph (Figure 19) shows the extensive salt beds of the Kewalo area, in an area probably west of the project area. The Chinese were involved in salt production, usually in concert with their management of fishponds. One son of a Chinese resident remembered the Chinese form of salt production (from ca. 1900) from salt pans bordering the sea, which were fed continually with seawater by the tides: Both the natural tides and the Chinese method of peddling a wooden wheel that transported water upward, helped to keep the salt beds damp with about three inches of water. After a few months, the senior Mau would drain off the remaining water and use a wooden rake with deep prongs to break up the salt. When the bed was dry a flat rake was used to flatten and smooth out the salt. Later it was raked into piles, packed in cloth bags and distributed. [Chong 1998:108]


38

3.2.8.2 Early Twentieth Century Land Reclamation Projects The justification for filling in low lying areas most frequently cited was public health and sanitation, the desire to clean up rivers and ponds that were reservoirs for diseases (such as cholera) and that acted as breeding places for rats and mosquitoes. The first areas to be filled in were those areas closest to Honolulu Town, then out toward Kaka‘ako and K lia (Griffin et al. 1987:13). The first fill material may have been set down for the Kaka‘ako Leper Branch Hospital (between Coral and Keawe streets), which had been built on a salt marsh. Laborers were hired to “haul in wagonloads of rubble and earth to fill up that end of the marsh” (Hanley and Bushnell 1980:113). Although public health and safety were prominently cited, according to Nakamura (1979), the main justification for filling in Honolulu, Kewalo, and then Waik k lands was to provide more room for residential subdivisions, industrial areas, and finally tourist resorts. Although the Board of Health could condemn a property and the Department of Public Works could then fill in the land, the process was rather arbitrary and piecemeal. In 1910, after an epidemic of bubonic plague, the Board of Health condemned a large section of Kewalo, consisting of 140 land parcels (including areas once known as Kukulu e‘o and Ka‘ kaukukui), which contained numerous ponds (Hawaii Department of Public Works 1914:196). The superintendent then sent a letter to all the property owners, informing them that they must fill in the lands to the grade of the street level within 60 days. Only a few of the landowners complied and filled their land with a variety of materials. Most of the landowners did not comply with this notice and in 1912, the bid to fill in the land was given to Lord-Young Engineering Company to fill in the land with “sand, coral and material dredged from the harbor or reef and the depositing of the same upon the land by the hydraulic method” (Hawaii Reports 1915:331). The recalcitrant landowners sued to stop the work. The expense of the suit did manage to shut down operations planned for the area from Ward Street to Waik k (Thrum 1915:159–160). This land was mainly owned by the Bishop Estate, who leased the land to small farmers growing taro and rice and raising ducks in the ponds. In 1916, the Bishop Estate announced that as soon as their present tenant leases expired, they planned to fill the lands and divide them into residence and business lots (Larrison 1916:148–149). It was during the 1920s that southeast O‘ahu was transformed when construction of the Ala Wai Drainage Canal—begun in 1921 and completed eight years later—resulted in the draining and filling in of the remaining ponds and irrigated fields of Honolulu and Waik k . The canal was one element of a plan to urbanize Waik k and the surrounding districts, first conceived in 1906. The final result was a “canal three miles long, with an average depth of twenty-five feet and a breadth of two hundred fifty feet” (Honolulu Advertiser, 17 October 1928:2, 16).


39

The first action was to dig a canal parallel to the coast along Waik k Beach. The dredged material was placed on adjacent properties from McCully Street to Kapi‘olani Park. This action affected several private landowners, including the Bishop Estate and the Booth Estate. The second action was to dredge a canal from the beach toward the reef. The material dredged was pumped to the new McKinley High School site, an area of former large ponds adjacent to the eastern boundary of the mauka portion of the Ward Estate (Hawaii Governor 1922:49–50). Additional dredged material was used to fill the area makai of the school grounds in 1930 (Hawaii Governor 1930:74). Several claims were made subsequently against the Hawaiian Dredging Company, including compensation for destroyed crops and livestock by farmers. For instance, a Chinese tenant farmer named Chang Fow, leasing lands in Waik k from the Bishop Trust Company, wrote a letter of complaint indicating the salt water that leached into his lands as a result of the dredging of the canal had devastated his fishponds and stocks of ducks and chickens (letter from Chang Fow to the Bishop Trust Company, 23 May 1922, cited in Nakamura 1979:100–101). His claims, along with those of other residents of the area, give an impression of the continuing agricultural subsistence base in Waik k that lasted into the 1920s, but rapidly became a thing of the past. In Nakamura’s (1979:113) The Story of Waik k and the Reclamation Project, he writes that this land “ ‘reclamation’ program changed the ecology of Waik k from a once viable and important agriculture and aquaculture center . . . destroyed by profit-seeking capitalist entrepreneurs . . . under the subterfuge of ‘drainage’ and ‘sanitation.’ ” Many of the original property owners lost their land or had serious damage to their property as a result of the reclamation activities and/or the costly expense for the mandatory filling in of their properties. In 1919, the Hawaii Government appropriated $130,000 to improve the small harbor of Kewalo for the aim of “harbor extension in that it will be made to serve the fishing and other small craft, to the relief of Honolulu harbor proper” (Thrum 1919:147). As the area chosen for the harbor area was adjacent to several lumber yards, the basin was initially made to provide docking for lumber schooners, but by the time the wharf was completed in 1926, this import business had faded, so the harbor was used mainly by commercial fishermen. The dredged material from the basin was used to fill a portion of the Bishop Estate on the western edge of Waik k and some of the Ward Estate in the coastal area east of Ward Avenue (U.S. Department of the Interior 1920:52). In 1941, the basin was dredged and expanded to its current 55 acres. In 1955, dredged material was placed along the makai side to form an 8-acre land section protected by a revetment.


40

Thus the process of land fill in the vicinity of the project was carried out over a long period of time in conjunction with a number of major municipal projects. The use of dredged materials (white crushed coral) in the construction of Kapi‘olani Boulevard is quite evident in a 1931 aerial photograph (see Figure 26). Much of the raising of the marshy ground surface in the vicinity of the present project area is, however, believed to have been accomplished by landowners using terrestrial soil as fill material. 3.2.8.3 Urban Development A 1914 Fire insurance map (Figure 20) shows a much different situation in the vicinity of the project area than the maps of the 1890s. A large number of tenements occupy the central portion of the project area. A new street, “Custer Av,” is shown as entering the project area from the northwest approximating the former Little Britain driveway from Sheridan Street (compare to Figure 15). A flume indicated as elevated 10 ft off the ground approximates the alignment of the former ditch (see Figure 16) bisecting the project area. Rice fields are indicated as present in the seaward portion of the project area with banana groves just to the southeast. The Chinese Consulate is located 20 m west of the project area and it may be the case that some of the small structures in the northwest corner of the project area relate to that Consulate. A 1919 U.S. Army War Department map (Figure 21) and 1920 map by Monsarrat (Figure 22) illustrate the environment of the western section of K lia before the construction of the Ala Wai Canal. These maps show the grid of streets extending out from downtown Honolulu to the north (mauka) of the project area and encroaching upon the project area from the north and west. Lands immediately south of the project area are still undeveloped and are believed to still be in agriculture (the last years of rice cultivation and banana patches). By this time, property in the surrounding area was owned by Walter Dillingham, who purchased it to use as a dump site for the coral dredged during such projects as the construction of the Ala Wai Canal. This western portion of K lia, one day to be the site of Ala Moana Center, was truly a low lying marsh area. The 1919 map also shows there are still many ponds in the eastern part of Kaka‘ako, especially at the future site of McKinley High School and the area along the coast, which would later be developed into Ala Moana Shopping Center and Park. The 1920 map depicts the relationship of the (then proposed) Ala Wai dredging to the (then proposed) development of Kapi‘olani Boulevard and the Ala Moana area. Little Britain still exists as a defined land area much as it had for 60 years. The “proposed Boulevard” shown south of the present project area was never built.


41

The 1927 aerial photograph (Figure 23) portrays with clarity a sharp distinction between the majority of lands of the project area that are well above the water table and support extensive housing and large trees and the lower lying lands just seaward that are divided into small agricultural plots (probably truck farms of vegetables). The land 100 m seaward is in much larger, roughly square patches that had probably recently been in rice production. Most of the project area appears to have been substantially developed in housing by this time (1927). The fire insurance map of that same year (Figure 24) shows the extensive housing development within the project area at the southwest end of Custer Avenue. The proximity of the “Japanese Baths,” 10 m to the west, suggests this area may have been ethnically quite Japanese by this time. Aerial photographs of the early 1930s (Figure 25 and Figure 26) indicate the open areas of K lia/Kewalo are in the process of being filled with material dredged from the Ala Wai Canal, Ala Moana Beach Park, and Kewalo Basin and with material from the city incinerator at the Kewalo coastline. A 1931 aerial photograph (see Figure 26) shows large white areas recently covered with dredged material and crushed coral. The largest white section west of the project area is the future site of McKinley High School. In 1928, work began on Kapi‘olani Boulevard, commencing at the intersection of South and King Streets. By 1931 the boulevard had reached Sheridan Street and by 1933 Kapi‘olani Boulevard had been connected with Kal kaua Avenue (Figure 27). This reclamation effort and the completion of Kapi‘olani Boulevard was associated with the establishment of a grid of streets and rapid development. The approximate alignment of Ke‘eaumoku and Makaloa streets is depicted on the 1933 map (see Figure 27) but they almost certainly were not paved if they existed on the ground at all (compare with the aerial photograph from six years earlier, Figure 23). A 1939 Land Court Application 1282 map (Figure 28) for adjacent lands to the northeast shows no such grid of streets. This map shows the former William Miller Grant 2341 as owned by the Anna S. Wright Estate (presumably having inherited the project lands from J.N. Wright who was shown as the landowner in 1891) (see Figure 15). The name “Independence Park Lots” is shown extending into the north portion of the project area. A large structure was seemingly associated with the name “Independence Park” on an 1891 Monsarrat map (see Figure 17) in this area but the history of the land development is unclear. After World War II, the Kewalo/K lia area became increasingly industrialized, and residents moved out to the newer subdivisions away from Honolulu’s central area. A 1943 U.S. Army War Department map (Figure 29) shows continuing development of street grids extending out from downtown Honolulu but generally few changes in the immediate region, although by this time the landscaping of the new Ala Moana Park has been completed. Although the grid of streets west of Sheridan Street appears to have been paved since 1933, the alignments of Ke‘eaumoku and Makaloa remain unpaved and buildings are still few and far between.


42

A 1947 Land Court Application 1515 map (Edith Josephine, Kapiolani Plews and Juliet Atwood, applicants) (Figure 30) shows the project area as divided up mostly into fairly large regular lots (numbered 23 through 27) facing (the future) Ke‘eaumoku Street with smaller lots (19, 20, 29, and 30) in the northwest corner of the project area. A 1950 Sanborn fire insurance map (Figure 31) shows a far more chaotic distribution of dwellings similar to that depicted on the 1927 fire insurance map (see Figure 24). The area has become more light industrial in nature with lumber storage, sign painting, a soy factory, and coffee roasting and a furniture warehouse just outside the project area to the west and a sheet metal shop within the project area. The Japanese Temple 30 m west of the project area continues to suggest a strong Japanese presence in the ethnic makeup of the neighborhood. A 1952 aerial photograph (Figure 32) appears to show a new development within the southern portion of the project area of 15 regular buildings in a three-by-five building pattern, quite likely apartment buildings. A drive-in theater is a major landmark 200 m to the southeast. This aerial photograph shows the neighboring lands to the southwest as developed and occupied by low-rise commercial buildings, but it may be noted that the grid of streets east of Ke‘eaumoku Street shown as early as 1933 (see Figure 27) appears to have no reality yet. Ke‘eaumoku Street (which was not shown on the 1950 map, see Figure 31) is now at least roughed in. A 1953 USGS map of O‘ahu (Figure 33) depicts development within the vicinity. The map shows the area of Ala Moana Center as a solid block and the location of the KGMB radio tower, which broadcast its first hour of television in 1952. The Tachikawa School 350 m west of the project area reflects the continuing strong Japanese ethnic presence. A grid of streets is still largely absent east of Ke‘eaumoku Street and is still somewhat haphazard west of Ke‘eaumoku Street. The 1959 USGS map (Figure 34) still does not show cross streets east of Ke‘eaumoku Street (other than the beginning of Liona Street) but does show early Ala Moana Shopping Center construction. The 1959 aerial photograph (Figure 35) shows a much different configuration of buildings than depicted on the 1950 Sanborn Map Company fire insurance map (see Figure 31). Visible now is a much more orderly arrangement of structures organized perpendicular to the new Ke‘eaumoku Street. Dwellings have largely been superseded by commercial buildings. The Custer Avenue alignment is almost undistinguishable. The 1969 USGS map (Figure 36), shows a grid of streets imposed on the Ke‘eaumoku neighborhood including a relatively new eastern extension of Rycroft Street on the makai side of the project area. In addition to the Tachikawa School, the Makiki Japanese Language


43

School is prominent 300 m to the northwest of the project area attesting to the continuing Japanese ethnic presence. By 1970 the project area appeared much as it does today. The demolition of the Civic Auditorium, just to the north, was a major change to the area in the 1970s (compare Figure 37 and Figure 38).

….. Section 9 Significance Assessments Historic property significance is assessed based on the five State of Hawai‘i historic property significance criteria. To be considered significant, a historic property must possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and/or association and meet one or more of the following broad cultural/historic significance criteria (in accordance with HAR §13-284-6):

a. Be associated with events that have made an important contribution to the broad patterns of our history;

b. Be associated with the lives of persons important in our past; c. Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction,

represent the work of a master, or possess high artistic value; d. Have yielded, or is likely to yield, information important for research on prehistory or

history; or e. Have an important value to the native Hawaiian people or to another ethnic group of

the state due to associations with cultural practices once carried out, or still carried out, at the property or due to associations with traditional beliefs, events or oral accounts—these associations being important to the group’s history and cultural identity.

One previously identified and four new historic properties were identified within the current project area. Table 28 lists the historic properties along with their significance/eligibility assessments and mitigation recommendations. These significance recommendations are included in this AISR for the review and concurrence of the SHPD. SIHP # -6636, buried wetland deposits associated with the Kewalo wetlands, was previously assessed as significant per HAR §13-284-6 under significance Criteria a (associated with events that have made an important contribution to the broad patterns of our history) and d (have yielded, or is likely to yield information important for research on prehistory or history) (O’Hare et al. 2003:69). Hammatt 2013 found SIHP # -6636 does not have the integrity to convey its significance under Criterion a. The former land surface and its potential features (i.e., berms, ponds, and other cultural components) are buried and their surroundings have been completely altered by modern development since their time of construction and period of use. Accordingly, CSH recommended that this historic property maintains the integrity to support its historic significance only under Criterion d exclusively for its information potential. Pammer and McDermott 2014 concurred with the determination of SIHP # -6636 being significant solely under Criterion d. This was based on the potential to further


44

understand the types of agricultural and aquacultural practices utilized and determine the boundaries of the Kewalo wetlands. The historic property retains integrity of location, materials, and association. This report concurs with this assessment. SIHP # -8801 consists of an ‘auwai ditch remnant associated with late nineteenth century development. A portion of SIHP # -8801 was observed in T-6. According to historic maps, this area was filled by the early twentieth century. SIHP # -8801 is assessed as significant under Hawai‘i State historic property significance Criterion d (have yielded, or may be likely to yield information important for research on prehistory or history) pursuant to HAR §13-284-6. The historic property retains integrity of location, materials, and workmanship. This assessment was based on the historic property’s potential to provide information on post-Contact land use (e.g., agricultural practices and water features) in the Waik k area. SIHP # -8802 consists of a buried asphalt road associated with a former roadway, which according to an overlay of historic maps is related to Custer Street, which existed between 1920 through the early 1950s. A portion of SIHP # -8802 was observed within T-4, T-7, T-11, and T-19. SIHP # -8802 is significant under Hawai‘i State historic property significance Criterion d (has yielded, or is likely to yield information important for research on prehistory or history), pursuant to HAR §13-284-6. The historic property retains integrity of location, materials, and workmanship. This assessment is based on the site’s association with the urban expansion of Waik k . SIHP # -8802 has provided, and can potentially provide additional information on twentieth century development in Waik k . SIHP # -8803 represents a pre- to post-Contact subsurface charcoal-enriched A horizon. Radiocarbon dates and taxa identification indicate the charcoal-enriched A horizon was utilized in both the pre-Contact and post-Contact periods. These indicators also identify the site as having permanent habitation and multiple use activity area functions. SIHP # -8803 is assessed as significant under Hawai‘i state historic property significance Criterion d (have yielded, or may be likely to yield information important in prehistory or history) pursuant to HAR §13-284-6. The historic property retains integrity of location and design. This assessment is based on the historic property’s potential to provide additional information on pre- and post-Contact land use activities in Waik k . SIHP # -8804, human skeletal remains, is assessed as significant under Criterion d (have yielded or is likely to yield, information important for research on prehistory of history) for its archaeological information and Criterion e (have an important value to the Native Hawaiian people or to another ethnic group of the state due to its associations with cultural practices once carried out, or still carried out, at the property or due to associations with traditional beliefs, events or oral accounts these associations being important to the group’s history and cultural identity) because of its cultural value as human skeletal remains, pursuant to HAR §13-284-6. The historic property retains integrity of location, design, and materials.


45

Section 10 Project Effect and Mitigation Commitments 10.1 Project Effect The proposed project will potentially affect five significant historic properties (SIHP #s -6636 through -8804) identified within the project area. The project specific-effect determination is “effect, with agreed upon mitigation commitments” pursuant to HAR §13-284-7. The recommended mitigation measures will reduce the project’s potential effect on significant historic properties. 10.2 Mitigation Commitments The agreed upon mitigation commitments for the Ke‘eaumoku Development Project consists of archaeological monitoring (a form of data recovery) and burial treatment. Archaeological monitoring of all ground-disturbing activities is agreed upon for the entire project area. On-site archaeological monitoring will be conducted to identify and appropriately document any additional exposures of SIHP #s -6636, -8801, -8802, -8803, and any newly identified historic properties that may be encountered during construction. An archaeological monitoring plan meeting the requirements of HAR §13-279-4 will be submitted for SHPD review and acceptance prior to the commencement of construction activity. A burial treatment plan meeting the requirements of HAR §13-300-33 will be completed for the SIHP # -8804 related to human interment. This burial treatment plan will incorporate appropriate input from the SHPD, the recognized lineal/cultural descendants, and the OIBC. The plan will be submitted to the SHPD and the OIBC. The purpose of the burial treatment plan is to request the OIBC’s determination of preservation in place or relocation of the previously identified human remains.

12. JUSTIFICATION

The proposed development will satisfy the objectives and standards of the Ala Moana TOD Plan, Resolution No. 17-314, CD1, as follows: 12.1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

12.1.1. Purpose & Intent of the TOD Plan (Section 1.1.)

“The intent is to make the most of the system for the benefit of the community, emphasizing transit-oriented development that will support transit ridership, improve pedestrian access, and fund neighborhood improvements.”


46

The approximately 964 condominium units and 88,000 square feet of commercial development will build a strong base of residents and workers to support transit ridership, just 1,600 feet from the Ala Moana Transit Station. Pedestrian access will be greatly improved with improvement of the sidewalk zone along Keeaumoku Street in accordance with Complete Streets Guidelines. These pedestrian improvements will be privately funded.

12.1.2. Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) (Section 1.1.2.) “Higher densities are an important characteristic of TOD and may be achieved through development of vacant land or redevelopment of low-density sites. Additionally, TOD should focus on creating a pedestrian scaled urban environment that is safe and appealing to persons on foot. Ideally, this involves a vibrant mix of land uses, generally encompassing residential and commercial activities, while featuring ground floor uses that maintain street vitality. Moreover, improved pedestrian and bicycle connections should readily link the transit station with major destinations and activity centers such as shopping centers and schools. Collectively, these measures will promote efficient use of land, encourage transit ridership, as well as support a diversity of land uses that are easily accessible and meet daily needs.” The Project will provide higher density by redeveloping a low-density site and will focus on creating a pedestrian scaled urban environment that is safe and appealing to pedestrians. The density will increase by about 12 times over the existing commercial floor area. Commercial activities are focused on the ground floor along both street frontages. The Project will provide improved pedestrian connections and a more active building frontage compared to the existing development on the site. Public open space at the park/plaza at the corner of Keeaumoku Street and Rycroft Street will provide a public oasis within this urban setting. Bicycle facilities, including private storage and public racks and possibly bike sharing racks are planned.

12.1.3. Revitalization Priority Sites (Section 1.2.9.) Ala Moana Center Station Proximity “Underdeveloped commercial properties along Kapiolani Boulevard are prime redevelopment opportunities. Redevelopment of these parcels provides the best opportunity for transit-oriented development within ¼ mile of the Ala Moana Center station and would contribute to Kapiolani Boulevard’s transformation into a highly identifiable, high-density mixed-use corridor linking downtown Honolulu and Waikiki.” The Project Site, although located along Keeaumoku Street, is located approximately 1,600 feet from the Ala Moana Center Rail Station and is considered one of the underdeveloped commercial properties that is a prime redevelopment opportunity. The redevelopment of


47

this site will contribute to Keeaumoku Street’s transformation into a highly identifiable, high-density mixed-use corridor, linking downtown Honolulu and Waikiki.

12.2. VISION & PRINCIPLES (Section 2)

12.2.1. Vision Statement (Section 2.1.)

“Ala Moana is envisioned as a livable urban community and a model for walking, biking, and transit usage. The new rail station and surrounding TOD district will include a mix of uses, spur redevelopment where appropriate, help revitalize neighborhoods, and provide infrastructure improvements for increased safety, better mobility, and a sustainable environment. The Ala Moana neighborhood will embody cultural and income diversity, convenience, and the aloha spirit – continuing its role as the place where locals and visitors gather together. It will continue to serve as a regional retail destination, and new mixed use development will improve the physical environment, safety, and mobility by providing community benefits as a part of each’s project’s implementation.” The Applicant plans to provide a mixed-use and mixed income development that will help spur the redevelopment of neighboring properties on this Revitalization Priority Site. The Applicant will provide traffic improvements as needed to accommodate traffic increases at the site and provide traffic safety improvements on-site and off-site as well. The Applicant plans to provide a commercial component to support the visitors in the Ala Moana area. The Applicant will replace existing structures on the Project Site with the residential/commercial building and include open spaces in an effort to revitalize the neighborhood and increase the density on the Project Site while keeping within the density limits of the TOD. Pedestrian access will be greatly improved with improvement of the sidewalk zone along Keeaumoku Street in accordance with Complete Streets Guidelines. These pedestrian improvements will be privately funded. Bicycle facilities, including private storage and public racks and possibly bike sharing racks are planned. Keeaumoku Street has not lived up to its potential as a mixed-use community with the BMX-3 Community Business Mixed Use zoning that has been in place for the last 30 years. The area between Kapiolani Boulevard and King Street has just one parcel located on the west side of Keeaumoku Street that has a mixed-use development with an apartment building fronting on Sheridan Street built in 1968 and a commercial space recently redeveloped near King Street. The remainder of this area is primarily low rise commercial developments that have been aging and, in some cases, deteriorating with limited redevelopment. There are only a couple of newer mid-rise office buildings on in this area.


48

The Applicant will provide community benefits in the form of affordable housing and a public open space (park/plaza) that will serve as a new gateway to the northern end of Keeaumoku Street in the TOD area. It will be the only significant public open space on Keeaumoku Street in the TOD area.

12.2.2. Principles and Policies (Section 2.2)

12.2.2.1. Residential Diversity (Section 2.2.1) “The TOD Plan needs to promote a wide variety of housing types and sizes to accommodate diverse lifestyles and varying income levels for the future. A mix of for-sale and rental housing within a range of prices would help attract a wider demographic, making local neighborhoods stronger and more sustainable……” “However, there is additional need for housing that attracts young families, empty nesters, and singles, all of which tend to use transit, walk, and bike more frequently. New affordable housing designed around walkable streets, mauka-makai views, prevailing breezes, and rooftop amenities would offer a viable alternative for urban dwellers that promotes greater diversity, safety, and activity in the district.” The Applicant plans to provide for a mixed use development with market and affordable residential condominium units in two high-rise towers along with commercial uses. The residential condominium units for sale will provide a wide range of housing types for residents of varying income levels, including affordable housing. Affordable housing units will come in various sizes, including studios, 1-bedrooms and 2-bedrooms. This mix of new housing types will be designed around new walkable streets, enjoying mauka-makai views and building orientation, prevailing breezes, and amenities, while providing for pedestrian safety and providing access to all the activities available within walking distance to the Project Site. 12.2.2.2. Mix of Commercial (Section 2.2.2) “A mix of commercial uses adds variety with a mix of large retailers and locally owned shops……” “Businesses should provide outdoor dining areas, free public Wi-Fi, shared parking, and district-wide promotion. The Convention Center would benefit from additional surrounding uses that support it, such as a convention hotel and destination restaurant, which would become an important gateway between the neighborhood and Waikiki.”


49

The Applicant plans to provide a mix of commercial uses on the ground and second floor in the towers including small storefronts and possibly restaurants and local shops to fill a need recognized in this section of the TOD and on two additional floors in the low rise commercial building. Outdoor dining is planned at the ground level. 12.2.2.3. Usable Open Space (Section 2.2.3) “New urban parks, playgrounds, plazas, and gardens that integrate into the fabric of the neighborhood can further complement this urban community. These new spaces would provide respite from the hardscape and pace of the city, and provide cool, contemplative spaces, social gathering places, active recreation areas, and a home for community oriented public events.” The Project will provide a total of approximately 43,353 square feet of open space including approximately 35,352 square feet that wraps around the Project Site, from the Rycroft Street driveway, along Rycroft Street, then along Keeaumoku Street to Liona Street and then along Liona Street to the Liona Street Driveway, which will be highlighted by an approximately 26,000 square foot useable park/plaza open space area at around the corner area of Keeaumoku Street and Rycroft Street that will be open to the public. An additional roughly 8,001 square feet of open space is provided along the east property and a short section of Liona Street, for the total of approximately 43,353 square feet. A portion of this open space (roughly 6,909 square feet), along the east property line and a portion of the north property line fronting the parking garage will not be open to the public for security reasons. The Project is planned to have two 400-foot tall, 44-story towers. The primary recreational opportunities located near the Project Site are the open space/park at the intersection of South King Street and Keeaumoku Street located approximately 700 feet north from the Project Site’s park/plaza and about a half mile away is the Ala Moana Beach and Park. Along Keeaumoku Street there are limited open landscaped areas of significant size. At Makaloa Street the ProsPac Azure Project will include a smaller landscaped public open space, but this Project will be the first to provide major open space (with about 20,000 square feet in a park/plaza and a total of about 0.99 acres in open space) along Keeaumoku Street corridor until one reaches the open space provided at the Department of Agriculture at South King Street and Keeaumoku Street.


50

12.2.2.4. Complete Streets (Section 2.2.4) “These rights-of-way would benefit from a consistent tree canopy, wayfinding, wider sidewalks, curb extensions, and other amenities that promote accessibility and walking and biking while maintaining the level of service for vehicles.” The Applicant plans to maintain the existing tree canopy along Keeaumoku Street fronting the Project Site. The Applicant will also provide wider sidewalks, which will create wide pedestrian walkways along Keeaumoku Street, all in keeping with this section of the TOD. The Applicant will also design the sidewalk zones on Keeaumoku Street, Rycroft Street, and Liona Street in accordance with Complete Streets guidelines. 12.2.2.5. Intermodal Connectivity (Section 2.2.5) “In order to improve conditions for pedestrians and bicyclists, the underside of the transit right of way should be carefully designed to promote an attractive and safe environment along Kona Street.” The Project is not located along Kona Street. 12.2.2.6. Incubator Office and Education The Project will not implement this section of the TOD, as no offices or educational facilities are planned at this residential/commercial development. 12.2.2.7. Cultural Programs & Public Events “Cultural programs and public events draw people together and activate public spaces……” “A business improvement district, or other entity, could help schedule, oversee, and create funding for events on the annual calendar.” The Applicant will provide an opportunity for smaller cultural events in its park/plaza, celebrating the “aloha spirit” shared in the community. The business owner will also support some of the major cultural events currently sponsored by the Ala Moana Center and other local businesses. 12.2.2.8. Public-Private Partnerships “A business improvement district (BID) would help stimulate local efforts to upgrade the neighborhood. Through progressive financing tools such as tax


51

increment financing, tax abatement, and infrastructure upgrades, P3s can “prime the market” for more long-term investment in the area.” Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) could help to fund and operate services that may otherwise not be available, to help increase safety and security, improve the quality of the public environment and run event programs. The Applicant supports the establishment of a business improvement district, as recommended in this section of the TOD and would be willing to contribute its fair share to finance programs that benefit the community.

12.3. DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK

12.3.1. LAND USE 12.3.1.1. Land Use Policies and Development Strategies (Table 3.1)

12.3.1.1.1. Intensify Land Use Surrounding Station Development should include compact development that reinforces the urban character of the Ala Moana Area, is consistent with TOD strategy and provides connections to transit. Strategies include: redevelop underutilized commercial parcels (satisfy latent potential for redevelopment and increase intensity along key corridors), adjust zoning within TOD district (allow more intensive uses within area and integrate residential and commercial districts), and increase FAR and height limit (encourage infill development, establish hubs in the area and maintain mauka-makai views). The proposed Project would redevelop the underutilized commercial parcels by providing a mixed used development that would increase the FAR and height limit. The Keeaumoku development Project would provide residential and commercial space for an increase area usage within the district. The two residential towers will be oriented in the mauka-makai direction to minimize impact to mauka-makai views. 12.3.1.1.2. Provide Balanced Mix of Land Uses Development should include uses appropriate to TOD strategy – mix of residential, hotel, retail, and office uses. Strategies include: encourage vertical mixed-use (combine residential and non-residential uses and activate streets with ground floor retail),


52

create TOD and TIZ zones within district (integrate commercial and residential and create areas to fulfill all daily activities without driving), and reduce amount of adult land uses (discourage adult land uses across zoning designations). The Applicant plans to provide three of the four uses appropriate to the TOD strategy: a large residential and retail component and office in a mixed-use development, with residential and commercial uses integrated vertically. It will activate Keeaumoku Street with ground floor retail and open space open to the public. With close proximity to the Ala Moana Center, Don Quixote, Kapiolani Boulevard and various restaurants, walking to these venues becomes an option for most of the residents and guests. Also within walking distance (about half a mile) is Ala Moana Park and beyond that, the beach and the shoreline. 12.3.1.1.3. Diversify Housing Options Development in the Ala Moana Area should include market-rate and affordable housing, a mix of residential building typologies, and rental and for sale units. Strategies include: encourage new affordable units (require affordable housing in conjunction with new residential development and reduce parking requirements), conserve in-town housing (maintain affordable housing supply and preserve Sheridan Tract), offer affordable housing incentives (provide height and density bonuses for affordable housing and establish affordable housing incentives). The Project will include approximately 964 condominium residences, of that total, there will be 146 affordable condominium residences (97 required by Ordinance 18-10 and 49 affordable units as a community benefit) with ancillary common area uses and about 88,000 square feet of commercial uses (including retail, eating and drinking establishments, offices and other uses), and 1,571 parking stalls. The Project will provide a total of approximately 43,353 square feet of open space including approximately 35,352 square feet that wraps around the Project Site, from the Rycroft Street driveway, along Rycroft Street, then along Keeaumoku Street to Liona Street and then along Liona Street to the Liona Street Driveway, which will be highlighted by an approximately 26,000 square foot useable park/plaza open space area at around the corner area of Keeaumoku Street and Rycroft Street that will be open to the public. An additional roughly 8,001 square feet of


53

open space is provided along the east property and a short section of Liona Street, for the total of approximately 43,353 square feet. A portion of this open space (roughly 6,909 square feet), along the east property line and a portion of the north property line fronting the parking garage will not be open to the public for security reasons. The Project is planned to have two 400-foot tall, 38-story towers. The Project does not displace existing housing and does not affect the Sheridan Tract. 12.3.1.1.4. Strengthen Regional Draws Support or strengthen Ala Moana Center, the Hawaii Convention Center, Ala Moana Park and Keeaumoku Street. Strategies include: establish district hubs as gateways (reinforce district gateways and provide clear indication of entering Ala Moana), create network of open spaces (provide for active and passive recreation and link smaller open spaces to Ala Moana Park with bike and pedestrian connections), and employ “park once” strategy (discourage frequent use of automobiles within district and allow people to walk to all activities). This Project will provide needed residential units and commercial floors to support the retailers and restaurants at Ala Moana Center, in the immediate surrounding areas and along Keeaumoku Street. The Project will provide usable open space open to the public at the ground level as potential venues for many forms of play and interaction and possible small cultural events. The Project will provide a total of approximately 43,353 square feet of open space including approximately 35,352 square feet that wraps around the Project Site, from the Rycroft Street driveway, along Rycroft Street, then along Keeaumoku Street to Liona Street and then along Liona Street to the Liona Street Driveway, which will be highlighted by an approximately 26,000 square foot useable park/plaza open space area at around the corner area of Keeaumoku Street and Rycroft Street that will be open to the public. An additional roughly 8,001 square feet of open space is provided along the east property and a short section of Liona Street, for the total of approximately 43,353 square feet. A portion of this open space (roughly 6,909 square feet), along the east


54

property line and a portion of the north property line fronting the parking garage will not be open to the public for security reasons. The large park/plaza open space will provide respite from the pace of the city and provide cool, contemplative spaces for social gatherings. All of these proposals are in keeping with this section of the TOD. 12.3.1.1.5. Integrate Neighborhood Shopping and Services Developments should include public, private and non-profit institutions, viable neighborhood-serving retail and community services. Strategies include: establish mixed-use corridors (add local residents to support local retail and provide retail and office space for community services), develop local shopping areas (establish local hubs for neighborhood shopping and provide access from housing nearby), and provide community resources (encourage new community spaces near and within new development and encourage multi-use of civic institutions). The Applicant plans to provide neighborhood-serving retail and dining along the Keeaumoku mixed use corridor, provide housing above the ground floor retail and provide one park/plaza for small cultural events. 12.3.1.1.6. Increase Employment Base Developments should provide office in proximity to rail station, start-up businesses, and business support services and continuing education. Strategies include: develop business incubators (provide spaces for growing businesses and services that keep workers in the area throughout the day), provide appropriate land uses near rail station (encourage transit use for office workers and create a convenient and safe walk for employment base), and provide flexible office spaces (provide spaces for small, medium, and large companies). This Project will provide ground floor retail that could involve start-up retail businesses about 1,600 feet from the Ala Moana Center Rail Station.


55

12.3.2. Ala Moana TOD Special District (Section 3.2.2) The Project Site is within the TOD Precinct that surrounds the Ala Moana Center Rail Station and a targeted redevelopment area. The Project will provide urban-scale housing with supporting ground floor retail storefronts which will benefit the community. This development will reinforce Ala Moana’s position as a major employment center and visitor destination.

12.3.3. TOD Precinct Subdistricts (Section 3.2.3) The Project Site is within the Keeaumoku Corridor subdistrict which is: “This vital mauka-makai corridor connects upland communities and the heart of the Ala Moana neighborhood with the rail station and Ala Moana Center. Currently characterized by a number of small-scale commercial establishments serving a local clientele and the Sam’s Club/Walmart, some would like to see the area become an official Koreatown. Envisioned as the focus of locally-based commercial, civic, and cultural activities, future improvements should include:

Developing a more mixed-use character by adding new housing and community amenities

Accommodating local shopping and services Enhancing the pedestrian orientation of the street Improving the Kapiolani Boulevard intersection by making it more welcoming,

attractive, and safe for pedestrians”

The Project will develop a more mixed-use character by replacing an existing low rise commercial area with a new mixed use development with two high rise condominium towers with a commercial component and a large park/plaza of public open space and a community space for use by community groups. The Project plans to provide commercial areas to accommodate local shopping and services, including some of the existing Korean commercial services. The Project will also upgrade pedestrian circulation by maintaining the tree canopy along Keeaumoku Street fronting the Project Site, providing shade for pedestrians. The Project will also provide an open space and wider sidewalks along Keeaumoku Street. The new urban park/plaza will complement this urban community and add to the usable open space on the site. This open space will provide respite from the pace of the city and provide cool, contemplative spaces for social gatherings.


56

12.3.4. Land Use Distribution & Intensity (Section 3.2.5) HIGH-DENSITY COMMERCIAL MIXED USE:

“This land use classification concentrates density closest to the transit station. The Kapiolani and Keeaumoku corridors, as well as the Convention Center subdistrict, are specifically identified. Part of Ala Moana Center is also included to support regional scale uses. To support these subdistricts, a focus is placed on high-density development of up to 400 feet in height for projects providing community benefits. It is anticipated that these developments would serve local, regional, and tourist populations and include a dense mix of apartment/condo towers, office buildings, hotels, and destination retail.” The Project Site, located in the Keeaumoku Corridor subdistrict, is planned for a high-density mixed use development with a height of 400 feet to support the local and regional resident population with a dense mix of two high rise condominium towers and destination retail with eating and drinking establishments. Included in the high-rise towers will be affordable housing, with terms of 30 years.

12.3.5. Circulation (Section 3.3)

“To support the land uses mentioned, a comprehensive circulation plan must be developed and implemented. Currently, Ala Moana’s streets are auto-dominated and lack the amenities that are key in creating a transit-oriented district. The high use of non-automotive transportation modes in transit-oriented districts does not cause traffic to grow with new development like it would in districts with fewer transportation choices. In order to truly integrate the rail station into the district, the circulation network must: • Reduce dependency on automobiles • Promote an integrated multimodal transportation system • Incorporate a balanced hierarchy of roadways, bikeways, and pedestrian walkways • Make travel by alternative modes more convenient • Design facilities for access by persons with disabilities • Transform Ala Moana’s arterial and collector streets into multimodal, mixed-use

corridors that link activity nodes” The Project Site is bordered by Keeaumoku, Rycroft, and Liona Streets. The Project Site is located 1,600 feet from the Ala Moana Center Rail Station. A bus route to and from the station via Keeaumoku Street is also available, but may not be needed due to the Project’s walkable distance to the rail station. The Project Site is well served by an existing multimodal transportation system, including bus, bicycle and pedestrian routes. The Project will enhance the pedestrian experience in the area surrounding the Project Site with a planned park/plaza and landscaping.


57

12.3.5.1. Circulation Policies & Development Strategies (Table 3-2)

12.3.5.1.1. Reduce Auto Dependency Create an integrated, balanced transportation system with expanded mobility options. Strategies include: encourage non-vehicular modes (invest in transit system and prioritize walking and biking), introduce complete streets (provide quality facilities for alternate modes of transportation and eliminate auto-dependent trips), and transform arterials into multimodal streets (design streets and land uses to support alternate transportation modes and create seamless links between modes). The Project is well located for bicycle and pedestrian access to the Ala Moana Center Rail Station. The Project is located conveniently on the Keeaumoku bus routes and is near the South King Street and Kapiolani Boulevard bicycle routes. The Applicant will provide secure bicycle parking within the parking structure through bicycle racks and bicycle storage. Security will be provided through personnel doing their rounds and/or security cameras. The Applicant plans to provide bicycle racks on the property’s parking lot area and will also include a bike rack area along Rycroft Street. 12.3.5.1.2. Manage Parking Facilities Encourage less traffic and more parking options. Strategies include: “park once” strategy (discourage additional parking trips and allow people to access all needs by foot), reduce parking requirements (prevent the “over-parking” of the district, unbundle parking, and introduce car-sharing), and advocate shared parking (reduce need for new construction and better manage existing parking network). A balanced approach must be taken to provide adequate parking for employees, residents, and visitors to the district while still encouraging transit ridership to Ala Moana. The Applicant is proposing a structured parking lot which will be behind the main building and is in conformance with and encouraged in the TOD district to achieve a higher number of parking spaces with less land as well in conformance with the TOD ideals of discouraging surface parking lots within the


58

TOD district. The Project is also located adjacent to the TOD districts “Events Street Closure Area” which starts at Rycroft Street and extends down to Kapiolani Boulevard and will be able to provide parking for such events. As the TOD Special District develops and new transit become operational, the need for parking spaces will wane. Applicant will have the ability convert parking spaces into commercial and/or storage areas if parking spaces are no longer needed. The Project is optimally located and has a wide range of multimodal transportation options, including taking the bus, bicycling and walking to Ala Moana Park and the beach and the shoreline, Ala Moana Center, Hawaii Convention Center, Don Quixote, Walmart/Sam’s Club, Keeaumoku Street, and other nearby department stores and restaurants. The Applicant will provide less parking than required by the LUO. 12.3.5.1.3. Promote Transit Usage Promote transit use to access major destinations and integrate the transit network. Strategies include: make transit attractive (provide comfortable shelters and ensure high district coverage),integrate multiple modes at station (establish rail station as transportation hub and create seamless connection between pedestrian, bicycle, and transit), and improve access to district destinations (promote pedestrian and bicycle travel to station and improve access to shoreline). The Project has a wide range of multimodal transportation options, including taking the bus, bicycling and walking to Ala Moana Park and the beach and the shoreline, Ala Moana Center, Hawaii Convention Center and other nearby department stores and restaurants. The Project’s 1,600-foot distance to the Ala Moana Center Rail Station will be a strong tool in encouraging use of the rail system by residents and guests in the Project. 12.3.5.1.4. Introduce Bike Friendly Streets Provide a connected bike network and safe facilities.


59

Strategies include: establish robust bicycle network (provide connections on a district level, build protected bike lanes, and reduce automobile speeds), construct bike path as first choice (ensure safe bicycle travel and separate bicyclists from pedestrians and automobiles), and create connected bike storage facilities (locate in safe areas to eliminate theft and allow expansion for future facilities). The Applicant will provide secure bicycle parking within the parking structure through bicycle racks and bicycle storage. Security will be provided through personnel doing their rounds and/or security cameras. The Applicant plans to provide bicycle racks on the property’s parking lot area and will also include a bike rack area along Rycroft Street. 12.3.5.1.5. Make Ala Moana Walkable Provide safe, convenient, and comfortable place to walk and make walking the mode of choice for short trips. Strategies include: introduce alternative paths (create pedestrian-only paths, create mid-block passageways and emphasize mauka-makai connections), improve intersection geometry (provide additional pedestrian crosswalks, reduce automobile speeds through intersections, and shorten pedestrian crossing distances), and promote safe pedestrian routes (enhance sidewalks through improvements, install signalized crosswalks, scramble system, and construct elevated pedestrian crossings). At its base, the Project will create pedestrian-friendly sidewalks with activated street-level frontages and upgrades to pedestrian circulation by maintaining the existing tree canopy that provide shade for pedestrians along Keeaumoku Street. The proposed new park/plaza will complement this urban community and add to the usable open space open to the public on the site. This open space will provide respite from the pace of the city and provide cool, contemplative spaces for social gatherings. 12.3.5.1.6. Reduce Conflicts Between Modes Provide safety and equitable allocation of street space. Strategies include: reduce automobile speeds (minimize lane widths, use traffic calming in places, mandate right turns at parking garages, and prohibit right turns on red), separate modes where appropriate


60

(construct elevated pedestrian crossings, install scramble intersections, and provide separated bicycle lanes), and maintain visibility of pedestrians and bicyclists (make crosswalks highly visible, eliminate parking spots at intersections, and provide sufficient street lighting at night). Automobile and service access points minimize as much as possible the disruption of the street-facing elevations. Driveways are separated from each other and from intersections. Two parking access driveways are provided, a right-in/right-out driveway on Rycroft Street (to minimize impact) and a driveway on Liona Street to allow distribution of trips to both streets. 12.3.5.1.7. Enhance Mauka-Makai Links Provide connected neighborhood with multiple route choices. Strategies include: enhance pedestrian facilities (improve Makiki Stream and protect mahogany trees and provide clear pedestrian access through district to rail station and beyond), connect bike network & transit (bicycle facilities on Piikoi, Pensacola, Keeaumoku and Kalakaua and new mauka-makai bus routes), emphasize neighborhood connectivity (consistent streetscapes and shade to encourage Makiki residents to walk to district and rail station, and introduce in the long-term new streets that break up large blocks). Keeaumoku Street provides a mauka-makai link. The Applicant will improve the sidewalk zone on Keeaumoku Street, improving the pedestrian experience along this street and provide connections to neighboring streets. The Applicant will also provide a bike share rack on the property to encourage bicycle use on Keeaumoku Street.

12.3.5.2. Roadway Hierarchy (Section 3.3.2) Keeaumoku Street is an Urban Minor Arterial, an important mauka-makai connection to Ala Moana Center.

12.3.5.3. Bicycle Network (Section 3.3.3) The current bicycle network within the Ala Moana district includes existing bicycle paths through Ala Moana Park and along the Ala Wai Canal Promenade. Additionally, a marked bike lane exists on Young Street, but discontinues as it approaches Downtown.


61

The 2012 O‘ahu Bike Plan, within the Ala Moana neighborhood, calls for bicycle lanes or routes along many of the area’s arterial and collector roadways, specifically Kalakaua Avenue, Piikoi Street, and Ala Moana Boulevard. In addition, the plan calls for expanding the bicycle rack program at Ala Moana Park. The TOD plan calls for expanding the bicycle network beyond the O‘ahu Bike Plan proposals, including: Bike Paths/Cycle Tracks – off-street or on-street facilities with physical separation from vehicular traffic; Bike Lanes – on-street demarcation delineated by a white line, typically 5-6 feet wide with pavement stencils to signal bicycle use only; and Neighborhood Bike Routes – on-street demarcation generally in sharrow form (shared use bike lane), no separation from vehicular traffic but indications of a bike-friendly street. A 2-way bike lane or cycle track is planned for Kapiolani Boulevard. The TOD-planned 2-way bicycle lane or cycle track on Kapiolani Boulevard will provide for the bicycle connection to the Ala Moana Center Rail Station. Currently, however, Keeaumoku Street does not have a dedicated bike lane. The Project will provide 20 bicycle parking stalls, and is at a walkable distance to stores and bus stops. Bicycle Parking/Storage Facilities: integral to supporting this expanded bicycle network are robust bicycle parking and storage facilities, which must include – visible, well-signed bicycle parking and storage facilities/lockers at or near the rail station; short-term bicycle parking facilities appropriate for public parks and civic facilities; and a bike sharing program. Bicycle parking and storage will be provided on the Project Site in the front yard area as well as within the parking garage. The Applicant plans to provide bicycle racks on the property’s parking lot area and will also include a bike rack area along Rycroft Street.

12.3.5.4. Pedestrian Connectivity (Section 3.3.4) “One of the community’s most important goals is improving the quality and safety of the walking environment in the Ala Moana District. These improvements are important for short pedestrian trips and the character of the neighborhood.” The sidewalk zone fronting the Project Site will include ample sidewalk space, enhanced streetscape amenities such as trees on Keeaumoku Street, pedestrian-scale lighting, and furniture to accommodate heavy pedestrian flows and enhance commercial activity within a mixed use development. The sidewalk zone will be developed in accordance with Complete Street guidelines.


62

12.3.5.5. Parking & Servicing Strategy (Section 3.3.5) “Managing parking is a critical element of creating a walkable district and encouraging alternate travel modes.” The Project Site is designated as a shared parking site. The Applicant will consider providing parking for public use within the parking garage through shared parking. The concept of shared parking works for the residential parking area if residents drive to work, freeing up their stalls for use during business hours to the public and possibly as a park and ride for transit. However, if the Project is successful in encouraging transit ridership with the proposed Ala Moana Center Rail Station shared parking may not be an option. The Applicant will be providing structured parking to achieve a higher number of parking stalls with fewer sprawls. The Applicant plans to provide 1,571 parking stalls.

12.3.6. Open Space (Section 3.4) 12.3.6.1. Concept (Section 3.4.1)

“Currently, the Ala Moana neighborhood has insufficient community parks and recreational facilities for the densely populated area. In particular, outdoor public spaces are lacking near the rail station.” Open Space Policies & Development Strategies (Table 3-4) Maximize Existing Open Space with improvement of existing facilities and preservation of existing open space. Strategies include: upgrade existing parks (make Ala Moana Park capital investments and improve Sheridan and Pawaa In-Ha Park Facilities), ensure existing open spaces cannot be developed (classify all existing major open spaces as P-2 zoning), and expand uses at existing parks (allow food vendors and introduce event programming). These strategies are considered public strategies and the Applicant understands that the City is moving to improve Ala Moana Park. Expand Open Space Network with new spaces to support new resident population and urban scale consistent with surrounding development.


63

Strategies include: provide transit plaza (link rail station to Keeaumoku Street and Kapiolani Boulevard intersection and establish “heart” of Ala Moana district), encourage new types of open space (expand sidewalk network with parklets and provide plazas and parks within the core of Ala Moana), and create temporary spaces through street closures (create temporary open spaces and identify temporary closure areas with special street paving). The Project Site is located at Keeamoku Street extending from Rycroft to Liona Street. The Applicant plans to provide a park/plaza open space on Keeaumoku Street within the Project Site adjacent to the sidewalk to provide a more spacious sidewalk area. The Project will create pedestrian-friendly sidewalks on Keeaumoku Street, fronting the Project Site, which would seamlessly connect the “heart” of Ala Moana district. Increase Recreational Opportunity with a diversity of recreational opportunities and linked network of recreation options. Strategies include: incorporate community meeting spaces into new developments (provide venues for community cultural events and allow for year round use), expand upon recreational bike network (connect to Waikiki, Downtown, mauka areas and Ala Moana Park), and promote pedestrian and bicycle access (bring proposed signalized crosswalks near open spaces and build bike paths to/from open spaces). The Applicant’s park/plaza area plan provides an opportunity for small community cultural events and will be able to accommodate year-round use. The Applicant will also have event space within the Project that can be booked year-round by the community. The City has plans to improve the bike network through the Ala Moana district, with access to mauka areas. Enhance Streetscapes through increased pedestrian movement within the district and consistency in the pedestrian experience. Strategies include: create tree-lined streets (maintain consistent tree placement, provide shading along streets and preserve adequate sidewalk width for pedestrians), fulfill complete streets ordinance (expand sidewalks where possible, reduce sidewalk obstructions, and provide curb cuts at street intersections), and improve the pedestrian experience (provide appropriate amount of street seating and landscaping and encourage active land uses that provide “eyes on the street”). The Applicant plans to provide consistent tree placement, providing shade along Keeaumoku Street and will provide adequate sidewalk widths for pedestrians along Keeaumoku, Rycroft, and Liona Street in accordance with sidewalk zone Complete


64

Street guidelines. The Applicant will expand sidewalks where possible and reduce sidewalk obstructions along Keeaumoku, Rycroft, and Liona Street. The Applicant plans commercial uses with activated window displays that will provide “eyes on the street”, a variety of seating options and possible outdoor dining if an appropriate and willing vendor can be found. The Keeaumoku Redevelopment Project, is located between Liona, Keeaumoku and Rycroft Streets. The objective of the landscape design is to provide a unique Hawaiian experience. The Hawaiian “sense of place” is derived from cultural perceptions that are taught, as well as sensory aspects that are felt. The cultural component of the landscape is expressed through the use of native Hawaiian and Polynesian-introduced plants that have always been important to the Hawaiian culture. In addition to these native plants, many of the exotics that visitors have come to associate with Hawaii will be used. These have been included because our Hawaiian “sense of place” is perceived not only through our culture, but our senses of sight, smell, touch, taste and sound. Given the tower’s size and proximity to the street, the landscaping became a vital factor in creating a transition between the residential towers and surrounding environment. A large lawn area and Coconut Palms provided an open, inviting atmosphere at the corner of Keeaumoku and Rycroft Street. A "lei" of green planted with A'ali'i, Na'u (Native Hawaiian Gardenia) and Pualoalo (Native White Hibiscus) will weave its way mauka. The lei separates the pedestrians from the vehicular traffic and thereby also reduces one's perception of the noise, but still allows views into the large open park. Monkeypod, Hala, True Kamani, Puakenikeni, and Ohia Lehua Mamo trees, Coconut and Fiji Fan palms will be used to enhance the Hawaiian Sense of place expressed in the architecture as well as to mitigate the height of the tower to the passersby below. The fragrance of the Puakenikeni, Shell Ginger, Pualoalo, and Na'u will be incorporated within the landscape to further enhance the garden-like setting. The plant palette will be limited to provide a simple, elegant image. Groundcovers in varying shades of green, but with contrasting textures and shapes, will provide a soothing atmosphere. Shrubs and trees will provide visual accent and appeal to the sense of smell to provide a richer experience. The park will feature a native Hawaiian garden to provide an amenity not only for residents and guests, but the larger community. Lawn is proposed in the middle of the space to provide an open area for children to play.


65

12.3.6.2. Public Open Space (Public Ownership) (Section 3.4.2) The City has plans to improve Ala Moana Beach Park, the largest public ownership open space in the vicinity of the Project Site. The residents of the Project are expected to enjoy the use of the Ala Moana beach and park area, which includes public tennis courts and great surf breaks. Nearby public open space parks are at the corner of South King Street and Keeaumoku Street (approximately 280 feet north from the Project Site), Sheridan Community Park (approximately 1,200 feet west from the Project Site), and Cartwright Neighborhood Park (approximately 1,400 feet north from the Project Site). Improvement and enhancement of existing and proposed publicly-owned open space including a community park, pocket parks, a transit plaza, a community plaza, an arterial streetscape, a neighborhood streetscape and an events street closure area, is expected to be funded and managed by the City.

12.3.6.3. On-Site Open Space (Private Ownership) (Section 3.4.3)

Wide Sidewalks/Parklets: “Wide sidewalks may encroach onto privately-owned space, especially along arterial streets. Parklets are small patches of open space. Both are options within a community benefits program.” The Applicant plans to provide wide sidewalks and an open space area on Keeaumoku Street on the Project Site as part of a community benefits package. Publicly Accessible Plazas: “Public plazas are areas for passive recreation within an urban environment. Remaining publicly accessible, while surrounding it with active ground floor uses is key to ensuring a plaza’s public use throughout the day.” At its base, the Project will create pedestrian-friendly sidewalks with activated street-level frontages culminating in a public park/plaza at the entry/exit of the motor court on Rycroft Street. Mall Passage Since the Project will not include a shopping mall, mall passage is not an option with this Project.


66

Amenity Decks/Terraces “Amenity decks and terraces are open spaces on building roofs and parking garages that occupants can utilize for recreation and private gatherings.” The Applicant plans to construct amenity decks on the roof deck of the parking garage. Makiki Stream Trail The Project Site is not located in proximity to the Makiki Stream Trail and the Project will not include improvements to a stream trail.

12.3.7. Urban Design (Section 3.5)

12.3.7.1. Concept (Section 3.5.1)

Establishing specific urban design principles for the Ala Moana district can reinforce a sense of place by creating a distinct physical environment. Urban Design Policies & Development Strategies (Table 3-5) Reinforce Neighborhood Character by encouraging development compatible with physical and social character of Ala Moana. Strategies include: develop subdistricts within Ala Moana (develop uniqueness of Sheridan, Kaheka, Ala Moana Center, and other areas within the Ala Moana district) and require pedestrian-oriented ground floors (require buildings to add to pedestrian realm and create consistent neighborhood experience). The Applicant plans to create an iconic structure which will create a unique look to this important location on Keeaumoku Street extending from Rycroft to Liona Street. It will set the tone for future development along the Keeaumoku Corridor. At its base, the Project will create pedestrian-friendly sidewalks with activated street-level frontages culminating in a public park/plaza at the entry/exit to the motor court on Rycroft Street. The tower contains retail, lobbies and drop-off areas and service functions, and back-of-house areas. This necessary massing addresses the adjacent street alignments and provides glazing or semi-transparent screened areas to blend the various uses behind.


67

Protect Mauka-Makai Views a concept with high community importance. Strategies include: establish proper design standards & heights (utilize height setbacks to reduce potential visual barriers while still allowing for development), require mauka-makai tower orientation (establish massing guidelines that maximize views of shoreline and mountains and develop tower spacing requirements), and enhance corridor viewpoints (utilize buildings as view frames and protect views from public spaces). The Project’s siting and orientation is intended to strongly address Keeaumoku Street while utilizing the height limit and density. The towers are oriented in a mauka/makai direction to minimize impacts to the corridors viewpoints. The proposed Project is not expected to obstruct the views of shorelines and other viewpoints as the current area views are obstructed by existing buildings and structures. Preserve Historic & Cultural Resources by reflecting the community’s history and embracing the future. Strategies include: encourage architectural preservation (encourage restoration and rehabilitation of historic structures), celebrate existing resources (develop wayfinding to sites within the neighborhood and explain their importance to the public), and incentivize preservation (provide financial incentives towards rehabilitation of historic structures and down-zone important cultural resources). Most of the one-story to three-story structures on the Project Site were built between 1954 and 1974. Although most of the buildings are over 50 years in age, none of the buildings are on the Federal or State Historic Registers. Promote Compatibility of Scale through appropriate transitions between different uses and subdistricts. Strategies include: provide appropriate height and density transitions (provide highest height and density at station and provide consistent setbacks), establish lot coverage and yard standards (prevent huge discrepancies between adjacent buildings), and restrict off-street surface parking (prevent conflicts with urban scale of new transit-oriented development). The Project Site is in a subdistrict that allows for the maximum height of 400 feet and maximum density of 7.0 FAR, the highest allowed in the district. The Project Site is located just 1,600 feet from Ala Moana Center Rail Station and will create ridership through its commercial and residential development. The Project will


68

comply with lot coverage and yard standards of the Ala Moana district TOD and will provide structure, rather than surface, parking. Create an Active Street Environment through pedestrian scale at street level and “eyes on the street”. Strategies include: apply appropriate development controls (ensure compatibility with context, establish active ground floor areas, and create consistent frontage along property lines), encourage building frontage as part of public realm (encourage use of the outdoor environment and provide visual connections between indoors and outdoors), and re-design area streets (create spaces for activation, reduce automobile speeds in key areas, and allow safe pedestrian and bike travel). At its base, the Project will create pedestrian-friendly sidewalks with activated street-level frontages culminating in a public park/plaza at the entry/exit to the motor court on Rycroft Street. The sidewalks fronting the Project Site on Keeaumoku Street will include ample sidewalk space, enhanced streetscape amenities such as trees, pedestrian-scale lighting, and furniture to accommodate heavy pedestrian flows and enhance commercial activity within a mixed use development. Establish District Gateways, including visual gateways that mark entrances to the district, especially along major streets. Strategies include: provide visual cues of entering the district (install gateway signage indicating entry into the Ala Moana district, establish gateway-specific landscaping and add wayfinding elements as necessary), develop gateways as a destination (encourage iconic development at gateways and create spaces for passive or active recreation). The Project Site is not located at a District Gateway. Support Public Events including cultural community events that celebrate and bring together the residents and visitors of Ala Moana. Strategies include: create new events (encourage area organizations and businesses to program events and explore creation of a BID – business improvement district) and create open spaces for community gatherings (establish locations for future community events and provide special paving in key areas), and relocate existing events to the district (explore moving Koreatown Festival to Keeaumoku Street).


69

The Applicant has included a park/plaza for public use in this Project, providing a venue for new and existing events. This open space will be available for community gatherings. The Applicant will provide special paving in the Project at the park/plaza and is supportive of the creation of a BID as needed to allow for a private/public partnership in improving the public spaces in the district.

12.3.7.2. Urban Design (Section 3.5.2)

12.3.7.2.1. Gateways Gateways provide visual cues to mark thresholds along major arterials. Gateways can be communicated through iconic gathering places or building, as well as public signage or landscape treatment. Ala Moana district gateways include, but are not limited to, Keeaumoku Street and King Street, Ala Moana Boulevard and Piikoi Street, Atkinson Drive and Ala Moana Boulevard, and Kapiolani Boulevard and Kalakaua Avenue.

The Project Site is not located at a gateway to the Ala Moana District. 12.3.7.2.2. Major Nodes Though these major nodes act primarily as intersections for vehicular traffic, they are also characterized by high ground floor activity and active or passive open space recreation. Pedestrian accessibility to these nodes that is safe and comfortable is key. Major activity nodes can be found at major street intersections such as, Kapiolani Boulevard and Keeaumoku Street and Atkinson Drive and Kapiolani Boulevard. The Project Site is not located near the two major nodes located at Kapiolani Boulevard and Keeaumoku Street, and Keeaumoku Street and South King Street. 12.3.7.2.3. Major Attractions Area attractions provide activities for the public within the Ala Moana district. Ala Moana Center and the Hawaii Convention Center, both located makai of Kapiolani Boulevard, are the principal major attractions and bring large numbers of people to the area. Walmart/Sam’s Club and Don Quijote are also major attractions that cater primarily to local residents.


70

12.3.7.2.4. Historic and Cultural Resources Within Ala Moana district there are several historically protected and culturally significant sites that provide links to the area’s past. These resources include:

Shingon Shu Buddhist Temple on Keeaumoku Street Makiki Christian Church in the Sheridan subdistrict Department of Agriculture building and grounds Ala Moana Park and facilities McKinley High School along King and Pensacola Streets Commercial properties along King Street Mahogany trees on Kalakaua Avenue

The Project will not affect any of these historically protected and culturally significant sites. 12.3.7.2.5. Landmark Building/Architecture Whether historic or not, landmark buildings help define an area’s identity, contribute to the skyline, and provide orientation in the district. New developments should enhance existing landmarks and create new ones for future generations. The Project is designed to include iconic towers that will contribute to the skyline with a beautiful and unique design. 12.3.7.2.6 View Corridors Mauka-makai views are valued by the Ala Moana community and these view corridors should remain a part of the district’s character. It is important to note that a mauka view does not have to be from the same place as a makai view. Some of the district’s main view corridors include: Piikoi Street (mauka-makai view) Keeaumoku Street (mauka view) Kalakaua Avenue (mauka-makai view) Kapiolani Boulevard (corridor view) King Street (corridor view) Ala Moana Boulevard (corridor view)


71

The Applicant’s Project Site is along Keeaumoku Street which provides a corridor view. The Keeaumoku Street side of the Project is setback fifteen feet, further than the 5 feet required to minimize impacts to the Keeaumoku Street Corridor view.

12.3.7.3. Viewshed Analysis (Section 3.5.3)

The City’s Primary Urban Center Development Plan encourages the preservation of mauka-makai views as directional references and panoramic views as a relationship between open space and Honolulu’s urban skyline. The closest viewshed diagramed in Figure 3-17 of the Ala Moana Neighborhood TOD Plan is along Keeaumoku Street originating at King Street, looking makai. There is also a viewshed on Keeaumoku Street originating at Kapiolani Boulevard, looking mauka. The Project will have minimal impact on these viewsheds along Keeaumoku Street, given the proposed 15-foot setback..

12.3.7.4. Building Form (Section 3.5.4) New buildings in the district should be built following these guidelines so as to accommodate additional density near the rail station while advancing the community’s vision.

12.3.7.4.1. Tower Orientation To define and protect mauka-makai views, tall buildings should maintain a consistent orientation in order to frame primary arterials and view corridors. Towers should be oriented mauka-makai to maximize ocean views for its occupants as well as to ensure that the important viewshed at Ala Moana Park maintains mountain views. The Project towers’ siting and orientation is in the mauka-makai direction between mountains and sea. The Project’s iconic towers are shaped and oriented to minimize visual impact in the mauka-makai direction. 12.3.7.4.2. Development Intensity Towers in the district should fall within specific height ranges to differentiate parts of the district as focal points. In general, the tallest buildings should be nearest to the rail station and the Convention


72

Center, and should step down to reinforce the Kapiolani and Keeaumoku corridors. The Project Site is along Keeaumoku Street and is recommended for the 400-foot height, which the Applicant is proposing. 12.3.7.4.3. Building Massing As buildings move up in height, setbacks on upper floors should allow ample sunshine, light, and blue skies to be seen from street level. Reducing the perceived presence of buildings and their shadows along roads is key. Tall buildings should adhere to design guidelines found in Section 5.9. The Applicant has provided a Shadow (Sun) Study (visual diagram), in Appendix VII and Section 12.3.7.5., Sun Study, which describes the impact of the building and tower on surrounding properties at different times of the day. 12.3.7.4.4. Ground Floor Activation At the street level, buildings should engage the public realm to create a pedestrian-friendly environment. Ground floor uses, especially along streets with high pedestrian traffic, should be active and visible from the sidewalk to create interest and improve safety. The Project will improve the pedestrian experience by maintaining the tree canopy along Keeaumoku Street fronting the Project Site, providing shade for pedestrians. The Project will also provide one park/plaza at the entry/exit to the motor court on Rycroft Street. The new urban park/plaza will complement this urban community and add to the usable open space on the site. This open space will provide respite from the pace of the city and provide cool, contemplative spaces for social gatherings. 12.3.7.4.5. Podium/Street Wall Along major corridors, building should be built up to the sidewalk to create a consistent street frontage. Intended to foster an urban atmosphere and a greater sense of place, tower podiums and their ground floor uses should face the street. Consistent street walls are proposed for Kapiolani Boulevard, Keeaumoku Street, and King Street.


73

At its base, the Project will create pedestrian-friendly sidewalks with activated street-level frontages culminating in a public park/plaza at the entry/exit to the motor court on Keeaumoku Street. 12.3.7.4.6. Scale Compatibility/Transition Appropriate transitions between land use, density, and height are needed for livability to maintain each subdistrict’s specific identity. Transitions can also help new development be sensitive to historic resources. As a general rule, greater intensities are found in the TOD Precinct, and lesser intensities in the TIZ Precinct. The Keeaumoku Corridor subdistrict falls within the TOD Precinct and has been designated for maximum 7.0 FAR and 400 feet maximum height, which the Applicant has followed in its Project designs.

12.3.7.5. Shadow Study (Section 3.5.5) Building shadows are important to consider in an area expecting significant high-rise development. During most of the year, the sun casts typical shadows found in the northern latitudes. However, as Hawaii lies between the equator and the Tropic of Cancer, unique shadows occur between late May and mid-July. Between these two dates, shadows are cast to the south rather than to the north. Careful consideration needs to be given to tower spacing, allowing solar access throughout the year. The TOD plan suggests a spacing of at least 100’ between towers. The Project Site has three street frontages, the two high rise towers design will have a setback of approximately 58 feet from the east property line at the closest point. The Sun Study in Appendix VII provides a visual diagram of the impact that the Project will have with shadows affecting neighboring properties. The effect of shadows from the Project structures on surrounding properties on the Equinox (March 20 and September 22), the Summer Solstice (June 21), and the Winter Solstice (December 21) of each year is depicted below. During the Spring Equinox: At 8:00 am to 10:00 am, and earlier, the Project shadows will affect a portion of Keeaumoku Street and properties located west of Keeaumoku Street on the block across the street from the Project Site with the shadows gradually shortening as you approach 10:00 am. At 10:00 am, the shadows from the Project will fall on a portion of Keeaumoku Street and properties located west of Keeaumoku Street on the block across the street from the Project Site, but mostly on the eastern part of the block. From 10:00 am until noon the


74

shadows recede back toward the Project Site and at noon the Shadow affects a portion of Keeaumoku Street with the balance of the shadows remaining on the Project Site. From noon until 2:00 pm the shadows stay mostly on the Project Site except for shadows affecting the area immediately across Liona Street from the Project Site for about half the distance to King Street. From 2:00 pm until 4:00 pm, the shadows move across the properties to the east of the Project Site and affect properties north of Liona Street and east of Amana Street, and shadows continue to move east until sunset.

During the Summer Solstice: At 8:00 am to 10:00 am, and earlier, the Project shadows will affect a portion of Keeaumoku Street and properties located west and southwest of Keeaumoku Street on the block across the street from the Project Site and portion of the Walmart/Sam’s Club parking garage, with the shadows gradually shortening and moving north as you approach 10:00 am. At 10:00 am, the shadows from the Project will fall on a portion of Keeaumoku Street and properties located west of Keeaumoku Street on the block across the street from the Project Site, but mostly on the eastern part of the block. From 10:00 am until noon the shadows recede back toward the Project Site and at noon the shadow remains on the Project Site. From noon until 2:00 pm the shadows stay mostly on the Project Site except for shadows affecting a small area immediately east of the Project Site. From 2:00 pm until 4:00 pm, the shadows continue to move to the east and covers the properties to the east and properties across Amana Street. across the properties to the east of the Project Site and affect properties north of Liona Street and east of Amana Street, and shadows continue to move east until sunset. During the Fall Equinox: At 8:00 am to 10:00 am, and earlier, the Project shadows will affect a portion of Keeaumoku Street and properties located west of Keeaumoku Street on the block across the street from the Project Site with the shadows gradually shortening as you approach 10:00 am. At 10:00 am, the shadows from the Project will fall on a portion of Keeaumoku Street and properties located west of Keeaumoku Street on the block across the street from the Project Site, but mostly on the eastern part of the block. From 10:00 am until noon the shadows recede back toward the Project Site and at noon the shadow affects a small portion of Keeaumoku Street and a small corner of the lot located across Liona Street at the corner with Keeaumoku Street, with the balance of the shadows remaining on the Project Site. From noon until 2:00 pm the shadows stay mostly on the Project Site except for shadows affecting the area immediately across Liona Street from the Project Site for about half the distance to King Street. From 2:00 pm until 4:00 pm, the shadows move across the properties to the east of the Project Site and affect properties immediately east of the Project Site and properties north of Liona Street and east of Amana Street, and shadows continue to move east until sunset.


75

During the Winter Solstice: At 8:00 am to 10:00 am, and earlier, the Project shadows will affect a portion of Keeaumoku Street and properties located west of Keeaumoku Street on the block across the street from the Project Site with the shadows moving in a north and east direction as you approach 10:00 am. At 10:00 am, the shadows from the Project will fall on a portion of Keeaumoku Street and properties located west of Keeaumoku Street on the block across the street from the Project Site and on the properties across Keeaumoku Street and to the north. From 10:00 am until noon the shadows continue to move on an arc to the north and east and at noon the shadow affects a small portion of Keeaumoku Street and a small corner of the lot located across Liona Street at the corner with Keeaumoku Street and properties to the north, across Keeaumoku Street on the eastern portion of the parcels, with the balance of the shadows remaining on the Project Site. From noon until 2:00 pm the shadows continue to move to the north and east affecting the area immediately across Liona Street from the Project Site through to King Street and beyond. From 2:00 pm until 4:00 pm, the shadows continue to move north and east and affect properties immediately east of the Project Site and properties north of Liona Street and a small portion of properties east of Amana Street, and shadows continue to move east until sunset.

12.4. PUBLIC REALM IMPROVEMENT (Section 4)

12.4.1. Concept (Section 4.1) Streetscape and intersection projects can improve the Ala Moana district through the addition of landscaping, pedestrian amenities, and bicycle facilities. Modifications vary from the addition of pedestrian lighting, benches, and trash receptacles to significant changes in roadway geometry and curbs to accommodate wider sidewalks, crosswalks, and bicycle lanes. 12.4.2. Streetscape Concepts (Section 4.2)

12.4.2.1. Kapiolani Boulevard (Section4.2.1)

Connecting Waikiki to Downtown Honolulu, Kapiolani Boulevard is central to the Ala Moana neighborhood and the Kapiolani corridor subdistrict. Lined with mature monkeypod trees that contribute to a desirable environment for pedestrians, the street currently lacks active street-level uses and adequate sidewalk width in some places.

Proposed streetscape enhancements include shops and cafes, pedestrian-scaled elements (benches, planters and sidewalk lighting), wider sidewalks where inadequate, and bicycle lanes in both directions.


76

The sidewalk fronting Keeaumoku Street will include ample sidewalk space, activated retail storefronts and enhanced streetscape amenities such as trees, pedestrian-scale lighting, and furniture to accommodate heavy pedestrian flows and enhance commercial activity within a mixed use development.

12.4.2.2. Keeaumoku Street (Section 4.2.5)

Centrally located, Keeaumoku Street is one of the most important streets in the district, providing access to businesses along it, Ala Moana Center, and the future rail station. This busy street can become extremely hot during the day and unpleasant for pedestrians. Walmart has provided lush landscaping, wide sidewalks, as well as some street level food retailers. This approach should be continued along both sides of the street as redevelopment occurs.

Proposed Streetscape Enhancements:

• Landscaping and facades with sunshading features • Enhanced pedestrian crossings • New bicycle lanes • New street-oriented retail, food and beverage offerings • Potential to close street for events

The Project Site is located on Keeaumoku Street extending from Rycroft to Liona Street. The Applicant will improve the sidewalk zone on Keeaumoku, Rycroft, and Liona Streets. The sidewalk zone improvements will follow the Complete Street guidelines for sidewalk zones.

12.4.2.3. Rycroft Street (Section 4.2.8)

Rycroft Street provides ewa-diamond head access to McKinley High School and the Kaheka subdistrict. It runs entirely within the Ala Moana neighborhood. It should support multiple modes of travel but should also encourage slow vehicle

traffic.

Proposed Streetscape Enhancements:

• Wider sidewalks with adequate lighting for pedestrians • Utilities placed underground • Additional street trees for shade • Curb extensions to increase pedestrian safety and slow traffic


77

The Project Site located on Rycroft Street will provide, wider sidewalks with adequate lighting for pedestrians, utilities placed underground, and additional street trees for shade.

12.4.3. Intersection Concepts (Section 4.3) Several key intersections deserve special attention in order to improve the non-vehicular connectivity and safety of the Ala Moana district. In addition to new pedestrian design elements and improve roadway geometry, elevated crossings are explored where pedestrian and automobile conflicts warrant grade separation, and where there are destinations at the elevated level. The Project Site is not located near a key intersection. 12.4.4. Station Connectivity Strategy (Section 4.4) “The intersection of Kapiolani Boulevard and Keeaumoku Street is the district’s perceptual ‘front door’. An interconnected series of legible and easy to follow improvements should take the pedestrian from this intersection to the station concourse. This link is essential to high transit ridership and the long-term success of the Ala Moana TOD district. The following strategy provides two pedestrian connections with minimal interference from vehicular traffic between Keeaumoku Street, the rail station, Ala Moana Center, and Ala Moana Park. Additionally, a midblock transit plaza can aid in providing vertical circulation to the elevated rail station.” The Project would benefit from the Center Stage Mauka-Makai Connection, a path through the Center Stage area of Ala Moana Center which utilizes existing mall circulation can also provide pedestrian access to Ala Moana Park. This connection would provide a more direct access for visitors and residents to Ala Moana Park.

12.5. ZONING REGULATIONS (Section 5) 12.5.1. TOD Special District (Section 5.1) The Land Use Ordinance (LUO) provisions for TOD special districts require any neighborhood TOD plan to include recommended zoning controls. These zoning controls will provide a basis for transit-oriented development regulations applicable to the Ala Moana station area. The TOD ordinance encourages mixed-use districts with appropriate design standards and controls to ensure an attractive environment compatible with surrounding land uses and promote more compact development.


78

Development of any property within the Ala Moana Special District must be in accordance with the standards and guidelines of the Ala Moana Special District, except for properties under the jurisdiction of the HCDA. The Ala Moana Special District (area within a ten-minute walk of the station) includes the TOD Precinct (close to the rail station, emphasizing a compact, high-density core) and the TIZ Precinct (the periphery of the district, emphasizing residential neighborhoods and community-oriented commercial uses). The Applicant’s Project is located in the TOD Precinct and, as recommended, is planned as a commercial business mixed use development and should the Ala Moana Special District be approved prior to its development, the Project will conform to the requirements of the Special District. 12.5.2. Zoning Districts & Use (Section 5.2) The Applicant plans uses permitted in the TOD Precinct (including residential and commercial – retail and dining) and none of the conditional or non-permissible uses. The Project Site is proposed for Commercial Business Mixed Use (BMX-3) District zoning. 12.5.3 Building Envelope Standards (Section 5.3) Intent (Section 5.3.1)

The Applicant proposes to develop the Project Site at a FAR of 7.0 with the provision of community benefits. The Project, as designed, meets the following criteria in the intent section of this section of the TOD plan:

Focus more intense development within the TOD Precinct Stimulate development and community benefits through FAR and height bonuses Create active urban street edges through strong street frontages Preserve mauka-makai corridors through consistent building form and massing

regulations Encourage highest and best use

The Project is within the TOD Precinct, where more intense development is planned, and proposes to achieve a 7.0 FAR, within the permitted maximum floor area and height (400 feet) through the provision of community benefits. As described in this report, active urban street edges will be achieved through strong street frontages that provide uses and indoor/outdoor connections including retail with display windows, a public park/plaza with retail store fronts, and possible outdoor dining.


79

The Project Site currently has a base zoning of 2.5 FAR which allows for a maximum buildable area of 76,865 SF. Under the TOD Design Guidelines, Plazas, arcades, parks, and other publicly accessible open spaces or arcades must be a minimum of 2,000 square feet in area to qualify as a community benefit. They should also be no less than 20 feet in width. This Project will be providing a substantial amount of publicly accessible open space 13 times the amount required to qualify as a community benefit (26,000 square feet). The Applicant will provide a total of approximately 43,353 square feet of open space open to the public, including areas for park dedication. The Project’s tower siting and orientation in the mauka-makai direction is intended to strongly address the street frontages. The Project’s towers are shaped to minimize visual impact from the mauka-makai direction, with relatively small and narrow tower footprints. When complete, the Project will represent one of the early projects in the newly adopted Ala Moana transit-oriented district. Building Heights (Section 5.3.3) The base height limit for the Project Site is 150 feet; the maximum height limit with community benefits is 400 feet. The Applicant proposes a community benefit package to achieve the 400-foot height and to achieve a 7.0 FAR. Building Form & Massing (Section 5.3.4) The Project will meet the building yards, setbacks, frontage, street-level transparency and minimum lot coverage as noted below. The Project will meet the setbacks proposed in Resolution No. 18-231, the June 2016 Draft Final Ala Moana Neighborhood TOD Plan, in Appendix I, Conceptual Plans. The Project’s compliance with the Proposed Building Envelope Standards for the BMX-3 TOD Precinct is provided in the following Table:


80

Table 5.1: Proposed Building Envelope Standards for the BMX-3 TOD Precinct

Development Standard Required Proposed Side Yard Setback None 10’ Height Setback Above 40’ 15’ Met except on Keeaumoku Street

(See Appendix I – Elevation – Rycroft an Liona Street)

Rear Yard Setback 10’ 10’ Street-Level Transparency 75% 75% Maximum FAR 7.0 7.0 Maximum Height 400’ 400’ Frontage 70% Front Yard Setback

5’ Keeaumoku, Rycroft, and Liona Street

15’ Keeaumoku 5’ Rycroft and Liona Street

*Maximum proposed height is 400’ plus 18’ for elevator overrides and mechanical spaces and roof access stair areas. 12.5.4. Parking Standards and Loading Standards (Section 5.4) Intent (Section 5.4.1) To encourage a reduction in auto-reliance and lower housing development costs, new parking standards should be established for the TOD and TIZ Precincts. These standards should:

Set lower minimum automobile parking standards Phase in maximum automobile standards Require bicycle parking to encourage alternatives to driving

Parking Ratios (Section 5.4.2) “Current parking requirements within the LUO do not encourage a transit-oriented character and maintain dependency upon the automobile as the primary mode of transportation. It is recommended that existing parking requirements are reduced by at least 50 percent, or eliminated for certain uses. In addition, it is also recommended that residential and some commercial uses consider unbundling parking to encourage the use of alternative transportation modes. The provision of bikeshare and carshare facilities can also reduce the need for private automobile parking spaces. Projects seeking entitlement bonuses must limit their parking provision to the current LUO requirements for commercial uses and a maximum of 1.25 spaces per residential unit.”


81

The following table contains proposed parking requirements consistent with the plan to reduce parking requirements in the Ala Moana District to the recommended parking ratios:

Proposed Parking Requirement in the TOD Precinct

ParkingStandard

Required (LUO Article 6)

FloorArea/Units

MinimumStalls – TOD

(0.5 per unit residential)

MaximumStalls - TOD (1 stall per

unitresidential)

RequiredStalls - LUO

Retail/Eating and Drinking Establishments (including outdoor dining areas)

1/400 SF 88,000 SF

293 293 293

Meeting Facility

1/75 SF 1,500 SF 20 20 20

Residential Visitor

1.0/unit 600 SF 1.5/unit for 600

SF< unit < 800 SF 2.0/unit 800 SF

1.0/10 units

180units 320 units

464 units

482

48

180 320

464

96

180 480

928

96

TOTAL 843 1,373 1,997 The maximum parking allowed by TOD is 1,373 stalls. The Applicant proposes to provide 1,571 parking stalls, which is 198 stalls more than the maximum number of stalls allowed by TOD and 426 stalls less than the number of stalls required by the LUO. If we consider the latest proposed amendment to the TOD, the maximum number of parking stalls for residences is 1.25 stalls per unit, which results in a maximum number of stalls by TOD of 1,518, just 53 stalls less than we are providing. A balanced approach must be taken to provide adequate parking for employees, residents, and visitors to the district while still encouraging transit ridership to Ala Moana. Right now, there is no existing rail in operation in service and while we are hoping and expect a future shift towards transit ridership with the proposed Ala Moana Center Rail Station located nearby, the reality is that parking is a required necessity today and a market driven requirement for buyers at this time.


82

In an effort to help mitigate the required parking spaces, the Applicant is proposing a structured parking lot which will be behind the main building and is in conformance with and encouraged in the TOD district to achieve a higher number of parking spaces with less land as well in conformance with the TOD ideals of discouraging surface parking lots within the TOD district. The Project is a true mixed use, live, work, play development that will include residential, commercial and open space features. The residential aspect includes approximately 964 condominium residences of which 146 will be affordable condominium residences with ancillary common area uses. The commercial portion will be approximately 88,000 square feet of commercial uses (including retail, eating and drinking establishments, offices and other uses) which require public parking in order to be economically feasible and sustainable. The Project will provide a total of approximately 43,353 square feet of open space including approximately 35,352 square feet that wraps around the Project Site, from the Rycroft Street driveway, along Rycroft Street, then along Keeaumoku Street to Liona Street and then along Liona Street to the Liona Street Driveway, which will be highlighted by an approximately 26,000 square foot useable park/plaza open space area at around the corner area of Keeaumoku Street and Rycroft Street that will be open to the public. An additional roughly 8,001 square feet of open space is provided along the east property and a short section of Liona Street, for the total of approximately 43,353 square feet. A portion of this open space (roughly 6,909 square feet), along the east property line and a portion of the north property line fronting the parking garage will not be open to the public for security reasons. All of these features of the project are significant and dictates the necessity for the amount of parking spaces being proposed. Applicant is proposing to provide adequate parking for the approximately 964 condominium residences. The residential parking will be owned by the unit owner. A number of stalls will be dedicated as public parking to support the commercial and park open space portion of the development. The parking spaces dedicated as public parking is intended to be managed by the commercial portion of the project. At this time, since there is no existing rail in operation in service and we expect a future shift towards transit ridership with the proposed Ala Moana Center Rail Station located nearby, the Applicant will consider providing parking for public use within the parking garage through shared parking. The concept of shared parking works for the residential parking area if residents drive to work, freeing up their stalls for use during business hours to the public and possibly as a park and ride for transit. However, if the Project is successful in encouraging transit ridership with the proposed Ala Moana Center Rail


83

Station shared parking may not be an option. Again, this is conceptual at this time as no existing rail in operation in service. Furthermore, since the Project is a true mixed use, live, work, play development that will include residential, commercial and open space features and is in close proximity to the rail station, these features will allow for better implementation of the “park once” strategy by reducing the number of vehicle trips needed to fulfill desired activities in the area. Residents can live, work, play in the confines of this proposed development. At this time, since there is no existing rail in operation in service and we expect a future shift towards transit ridership with the proposed Ala Moana Center Rail Station located nearby and as the TOD Special District develops and new transit become operational and the need for parking spaces wanes, the Applicant is considering converting parking spaces into commercial and/or storage areas if parking spaces are no longer needed. However, no specific plans have been developed to convert parking spaces other than to possible storage spaces. Bicycle Parking (Section 5.4.5) To encourage bicycle use, bicycle parking should be required in addition to automobile parking. Bicycle parking must be: Located in a safe place Provided on-street and near building entrances for short-term use Conveniently located within close proximity to the station and major Ala Moana area

attractions Secure for long-term bicycle parking (e.g. residents, workers) within parking garages

The following table contains proposed bicycle parking requirements in the Ala Moana district. The table provides the bicycle parking requirements and the proposed bicycle parking plan by the Applicant.


84

PROPOSED BICYCLE PARKING RATIOS

Land Use

Short-TermBicycleParking

Required

Long-Term Bicycle Parking Required

FloorArea/Units

Bicycle Parking Provided

Short/LongTerm

Dwellings, Multifamily

1 space for every 10

dwelling or lodging units

10 stalls

1 space for every 2 dwelling or lodging

units 482 stalls

964 Units 97/482

Eating and Drinking Establishments

1 space per 2,000 sf off

floor area or 1 space for every

10 vehicle spaces

44 stalls

1 space per 12,000 square feet of floor area or 1 space per

30 vehicle spaces, or portion thereof,

whichever is greater 8 stalls

88,000 gross

square feet

44/8

TOTAL 54 490 141/490 The applicant will provide 141 short term and 490 long term bicycle parking stalls. Loading The 88,000 square feet of commercial area will require 5 loading stalls (4 stalls for 40,001-60,000 square feet and 1 stall for each additional 50,000 square feet or major fraction thereof). The 946 multifamily dwelling units will require 5 loading stalls (2 stalls for 151-300 mulifamily dwelling units and 1 stall for each additional 200 units or major fraction thereof). The applicant will provide 5 large and 5 regular loading stalls in the ground floor commercial parking area. 12.5.5. On-Site Amenity Space Standards (Section 5.5) “With an increase in population, the Ala Moana district will need additional amenity spaces that are diverse in size and type. Carefully constructed amenity space requirements for new development can help achieve a more robust open space network for active and passive recreation for residents, locals, and tourists.


85

“The amount of residential spaces required are provided through the park and playground requirements found within Chapter 22, Article 7 of the Revised Ordinances of Honolulu.” Other forms of open space include public open space (publicly accessible with few limitations on when it can be used), communal open space (resident-specific open space including amenity decks), outdoor dining (ground floor), private open space (allow public use with limitations on when the public can use it), and balconies (balconies/lanais). The Applicant proposes public open space in the form of a park/plaza with few limitations on public use, communal open space in the form of amenity decks for residents and potential outdoor dining on the ground floor, and balconies/lanais for the residential condominium units. Amenity space will be required at 5% of gross square footage in convenience stores, eating and drinking establishments, and retail. The Applicant will have gross square footage of 88,000 square feet in these uses and will require 4,400 square feet of amenity space. The Applicant will provide this required amenity space in the form of one publically accessible park/plaza and communal open space at the amenity deck and balconies.

12.5.6. Community Benefits Bonus (Section 5.6)

A community benefits bonus leverages development potential to incentivize transit-oriented development, meet community goals and objectives, and mitigate development impacts.

1. PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE PLAZAS

“Public plazas are areas for passive recreation within the urban environment. Remaining publicly accessible, while surrounding it with active ground floor uses is key to ensuring a plaza’s public use throughout the day. Plazas are also proposed as an option within the community benefits program to allow for private contribution to the open space network.” Keeaumoku Public spaces general: Under the TOD Design Guidelines, Plazas, arcades, parks, and other publicly accessible open spaces or arcades must be a minimum of 2,000 square feet in area to qualify as a community benefit. They should also be no less than 20 feet in width. This Project will be providing a substantial amount of publicly accessible open space 13 times the amount required to qualify as a community benefit.

Applicant is proposing a total of 43,353 square feet of open space which includes about 0.85-acre of continuous open space in a park/plaza that will be open to the public. It is proposed that the open space will include a robust assortment of furniture and public amenities to create a comfortable and desirable environment. Shade trees, a mix of


86

hardscape and landscaped areas, activities, events and bicycle parking can all attract users to the public space. The majority of this public open space will count as a community benefit, however, a portion may be needed for park dedication requirements and will not count as a community benefit. This park/plaza will provide an opportunity for a recreation area for the residents and the general public, as well as a rest area for pedestrians and a gathering place for cultural events throughout the year. Applicant intends to have the plaza/park area privately managed and maintained by the commercial portion of the project. Applicant believes that the landscape features of the park/plaza that include new shade trees, a variety of planted areas, planter boxes, and unique informal seating and create pedestrian-friendly sidewalks with continuously activated street-level frontages will invigorate and create a strong focal point of activity to support the commercial portion of the project. The expected strong and robust commercial options in this development is expected to support the management and maintenance of the plaza/park area. Fortunately, the current bus stop is located adjacent to the Project’s proposed park/plaza area. The park/plaza area is being proposed to have enhanced pedestrian-friendly sidewalks, planned landscaping along Rycroft Street and will be located near an envisioned commercial, restaurant and retail activated street-level frontages.

2. AFFORDABLE HOUSING Based on the affordable housing requirements under Ordinance No. 18-10, the applicant plans to provide a total of 97 units (10%) of the total multi-family dwelling units in the Project for sale at affordable rates (50% at 120% and below of AMI and 50% at 100% and below of AMI), for a term of 30 years. In addition, as part of a community benefit package, the applicant will provide an additional approximately 49 (5%) affordable housing units of the total multi-family dwelling units in the Project for sale at 120% and below of AMI for 30 years. 49 On-site Affordable For Sale Units with a 30-year term

Providing 49 on-site affordable units with a 30-year term will result in revenue loss of approximately $4,400,000.


87

3. OUTDOOR DINING

The Project plans to offer outdoor dining in a 5,000-square foot arcade area. The estimated construction cost for outdoor dining in arcade area is $1,000,000. This improvement is valued at $1,000,000.

4. BIKE SHARE – BIKE RACKS

The Project plans to provide a bike station for 20 bikes at at an estimated construction cost of approximately $50,000 and requires a 40-foot by 6-foot footprint. The Project’s bicycle parking and storage facilities will be an integral aspect to supporting the City’s expanded bicycle network and compliment the nearby rail station. The bicycle parking facilities will also be a great feature to compliment the Project’s public park/plaza and commercial activities. Project is also looking at implementing a bike sharing program such as Biki as well.

5. ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS

The Project plans to provide a number of electric vehicle charging stations, at an estimated construction cost of approximately $72,000.

6. CAR SHARING PROGRAM Project proposes to work with a car share provider and provide a number of stalls (at least 3) for this use within the parking structure. The estimated cost for car sharing program is approximately $90,000.

7. RIGHT-OF-WAY IMPROVEMENTS ALONG RYCROFT STREET, KEEAUMOKU STREET AND LIONA STREET TO ENHANCE SIDEWALKS AND LANDSCAPING

Applicant plans right-of-way streetscape improvements to enhance the sidewalks and landscaping along Rycroft Street, Keeaumoku Street and Liona Street. Cost breakdown for “Streetscape Improvements”

The estimated cost of the streetscape improvements is $1,250,000. The estimated cost includes the following items:

Includes demolition of existing sidewalks Includes irrigation


88

Includes 15 each planters Includes planter backfill, medium trees, shrubs, and grass at planters along

Keeaumoku Includes maintenance Includes lava rock planter walls with seating Includes concrete sidewalks with curb and gutter Includes AC patch at curb and gutter Includes flagstone pavers Includes site lighting (low voltage)

8. COMMUNITY FACILITIES:

Community Center/Community Space. Applicant proposes to dedicate a meeting room facility open to the public within the Project for Community Use for holding meetings and events for community groups and organizations. (approximately 1,500 sq. ft.) This community space directly reflects the specific needs of the immediate area for a public gathering space to accommodate various organizations in the community. This Community facility will be made available to the public, and not just residents of the Project. The estimated cost for a community center is approximately $1,500,000.

9. OFFSTREET PARKING: Applicant proposes to provide parking stalls open to the public to help offset the lack of street parking in the area in order to help the managing of parking which will be a critical element of creating a walkable district and encouraging alternate travel modes. Applicant’s goal is to help assist with a unified parking strategy, especially since the Project is in close proximity to the rail station, which will also allow for better implementation of the “park once” strategy by reducing the number of vehicle trips needed to fulfill desired activities in the area. The Keeaumoku Development would allow its commercial customers, residents and public to park and walk.

10. ECONOMIC AND FISCAL BENEFITS

CBRE has provided an “Economic Impact Analyss & Public Fiscal Assessment” for the Project dated November 6, 2018. This report is included in its entirety in Appendix VIII. Excerpts from this report are provided below: “Economic Impact Analysis

We have constructed a model depicting the economic impact of the Keeaumoku Development Project on the Honolulu and Statewide community during its “lifespan” from anticipated ground-breaking in 2021, through build-out, full absorption, and stabilized


89

“operations” (commercial, common element management and maintenance) in 2024 and thereafter. The model builds on the absorption estimates and data contained in our market study. All estimated amounts are in constant 2018 dollars. We note, even if the timing of the development or absorption moves from our projected dates it does not change the resultant outcomes or indicators. The use of constant dollar removes time as a determinant variable. The purpose of the model is to illustrate how capital, jobs, wages, population and business activity will flow over time for planning and budgeting purposes apart from and present value considerations. Among the primary forecasts and conclusions for the economic impacts of the development of Keeaumoku Development Project are as follows:

The development of the Keeaumoku Development Project will bring in an estimated $714.6 million of new, direct capital investment (along with significant unquantified indirect expenditures) into the central Honolulu economy and real estate market. This will generate some $918.6 million in total new economic activity island-wide during its construction and absorption period (from circa 2021 to 2024), and it will contribute some $203.9 million in annual economic activity on a stabilized basis thereafter.

The construction of the Keeaumoku Development Project infrastructure, residential, commercial and central system components will directly create an estimated 2,400 “worker-years” of employment (the equivalent of 52 work weeks at 40 hours per week) in the trades and supply businesses during build-out, averaging about 600 worker years annually, with an estimated $183.1 million in wages (averaging about $45.8 million per year).

The operating businesses in the commercial components will create some 259-new worker-years of Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) employment on a stabilized basis with cumulative annual wages totaling $12.7 million.

The condominium common elements managers, and the upkeep, maintenance, and renovations of the approximately 964 housing units will create 62 combined worker-years of employment with associated wages of $2.8 million per year.

Associated secondary/off-site employment during the overall development and absorption time-frame will total 907 worker-years with wages of $50.5 million and a stabilized FTE job-count of 107 with total wages of $5.9 million per year.

At build-out and full-occupancy the average daily de facto population of the community will be some 2,219 persons, comprised of 2,085 full-time residents and an average of 134 non-resident second/vacation home users. The cumulative resident annual household income at stabilization is projected at $219 million. Discretionary expenditures into the OAHU economy/businesses community by the


90

Keeaumoku Development Project population will average $127 million per year on a stabilized basis.

The on-going business activity (excluding construction) in the community will average $76.9 million per year on a stabilized basis. The base impact to the Honolulu County economy from on-site activity and off-site spending by residents will average $203.9 million annually.

Application of the State Input-Output Model macro multipliers depicting direct, indirect and induced economic impacts arising from development of Keeaumoku Development Project results in significantly higher economic out-flow indicator than those from our direct, subject-specific micro model.

The total State economic impact from construction of the project would reach $1.4 billion, there would be 7,789 total worker-years of jobs created, and the total increase in earnings statewide would be $428.8 million.

The State model also estimates the total annual economic output from on-going business activity within Keeaumoku Development Project would be at $390.8 million annually on a stabilized basis. The total number of worker-years island-wide attributable to the subject dollars flowing through the economy would be 3,494 positions upon stabilization.

Public Fiscal Benefits

Public fiscal (or cost/benefit) impacts were estimated on a per capita basis for the part-time, second/vacation unit buyers and guests at Keeaumoku Development Project, estimated to average about 134 persons daily. This is based on a conservative assumption that each new person added to the Oahu community is “responsible for” a similar tax cost/obligation as every other person on the island. We note the actual additional costs and impact on services from these part-time residents will be minimal as they will place limited demands on schools, administrative infrastructure, most governmental services or facilities, and are unlikely to push emergency services beyond an expansion-requiring threshold. The estimated amounts represent “new” tax dollars and governmental expenditures resulting from the Keeaumoku Development Project. The 2,085 full-time residents within the project are assumed to be relocating from elsewhere on the island or the result of natural growth in the community so their government fiscal costs are already in-place or anticipated and factored into existing and projected County and State budgets. Likewise, we have not included their taxable household income or spending in the taxation model as that is already assumed to be flowing through the Honolulu County economy and government coffers and is being appropriately taxed.


91

However, their new units at Keeaumoku Development Project and the community/homeowner’s association operations and maintenance/renovations will add to the real property tax base of the County along with associated wages and construction costs that are subject to State Gross Excise and Income taxes as they are resulting from new construction while their existing homes will continue to require servicing even after they depart.

The City & County of Honolulu will realize Real Property Taxes and other secondary receipts and development fees totaling $37.4 million during the 6-year building and absorption projection period (2018-2024), and $11.1 million annually on a stabilized basis thereafter.

The State of Hawaii will receive Gross Excise and Income taxes, secondary revenues, and school impact fees of $61.9 million during the 2018-2024 modeling period, and $6.4 million per year thereafter.

After accounting for the per capita costs of servicing the new non-resident/second home owner population of the project, the County will gain a net benefit (“profit”) of $37 million during the development period and $10 million annually on a stabilized basis. The State will have net benefits of $60.5 million to 2060 and $5.1 million stabilized per year.

The major economic impacts and public fiscal conclusions (for the identified population) are summarized on the following table. The column on the left summarizes the cumulative impacts during the initial six-year build-out period (2018-2024) covering infrastructure emplacement, absorption of all products types, and ramp-up to stabilization of economic activity; and the righthand column the annual impacts after stabilization.”

COST OF COMMUNITY BENEFITS VS BENEFIT OF DENSITY AND HEIGHT BONUSES AND ENCROACHMENT INTO HEIGHT SETBACK

1. Community Benefits are Valued as Follows: a. 49 On-site Affordable For-Sale Units with a 30-year term $4,400,000 b. Open Space, Open to the Public (26,000 square feet) $8,450,000 c. Outdoor dining in arcade area $1,000,000 d. Bikeshare Station $ 50,000 e. Electrical Vehicle Charging Stations $ 72,000 f. Car Sharing Program $ 90,000 g. Streetscape Improvements $1,250,000 h. Community Center $1,500,000 Total $16,812,000


92

2. The Applicant proposes a community benefit package valued at $14,812,000 to achieve the 400-foot height (from 150 feet), to achieve a 7.0 FAR and for the encroachment into the height setback on Keeaumoku Street. The Applicant has determined that the value of the additional density from 3.5 FAR to 7.0 FAR (increase in floor area from 538,594 square feet to 1,077,188 square feet, an increase of 538,594 square feet) is approximately $19,927,978. The additional 250 feet in height relate to this additional floor area.

The value of the additional FAR was computed as follows: Total Assessed Land Value: $39,855,956.00 Value per Square Foot of Floor Area $39,855,956 Total Assessed Value 1,077,188 Total Floor Area $ 37.00 Value per square Foot of Floor Area

Additional Floor Area 1,077,188 SF Total Floor Area for 7.0 FAR 538,594 SF Total Floor Area for 3.5 FAR 538,594 SF Total Additional Floor Area

Value of Additional Floor Area 538,594 x $37.00 = $19,927,978.00

12.5.7. Architectural Character Guidelines (Section 5.8) In addition to the bulk, height, and setback regulations proposed in the TOD plan, the following guidelines are recommended to ensure new development contributes to making Ala Moana a walkable, interesting, and urban TOD community. Ensure Neighborhood Compatibility (Section 5.8.2)

Consider their surrounding context Match the desired scale and character of a transit-oriented community Closely study how building spacing impacts shadowing and wind Maintain at least 100’ spacing between tall buildings in order to preserve solar

access at street level

The building is designed to be aesthetic to the pedestrian on the ground floor and from the top of the building. The building overall massing, materials, and colors scheme would be consistent with surrounding area. The Project will have two towers designed to promote natural air circulation to mitigate impacts to wind and shadowing on the streets. Sidewalks


93

and walkways would have landscaping to improve the pedestrian experience and the frontage of the building would have front public entrances. The lobbies, social gathering places, recreation spaces, are all located within this space. The proposed Project will be designed to provide rich visual textures, landscapes, and materials typically found in the vicinity that is recognizable with a symbolic relationship to Hawai‘i’s environment, people, and/or culture.

The Sun Study has been described in Section 12.3.6.4.3. Building Massing and also discussed in 12.3.7.5. Shadow Study. A “Preliminary Wind Study” has been prepared for the Project by Englekirk Structural Engineers, dated October 26, 2018. A copy of the wind study is provided in AppendixVIX. Excerpts from the Preliminary Wind Study are provided below:

“3.3 Preliminary Pedestrian-Level Wind Results The main objective of a PLW study is to predict the wind speeds that would exist on-site and off-site for the determination of the various corresponding comfort levels. Assessment of the PLW environment is typically accomplished using wind-tunnel testing that matches full-scale meteorological data to physical modeling data. Inasmuch as this is a preliminary study, the opinions presented in this report are based on meteorological data for Honolulu, preliminary analyses of the site and our experience with other wind studies for high-rise structures in Honolulu. Wind tunnel modeling was not a part of this preliminary assessment, but this type of testing is recommended prior to finalizing the project design. PLW Conditions Prior to Development: The reference suburban and open wind speeds for this site have 10% wind exceedance speeds of 7.5 mph and 12.5 mph, which suggest a naturally breezy site. The reference suburban and open wind speeds reflect the 10% wind exceedance speeds at a typical suburban site built-up with a mix of different building heights or a site exposed to flat, open terrain without intervening development, respectively. In other words, these reference wind speeds provide a frame of reference to judge how the proposed development influences the pedestrian level wind speeds. As a result of the naturally breezy conditions, few points around and on the site are expected to satisfy the 7-mph criterion, even if no development occurs, while approximately one-third as many points are expected not to satisfy the 11mph criterion. All points on and around the site are expected to satisfy the 15-mph criterion prior to development. PLW Conditions After Development: Based upon results from other PLW studies for high-rises in Honolulu, including studies of projects within the general vicinity, it is anticipated


94

that there will be few points that satisfy the 7-mph criterion (i.e., approximately the same result as for the PLW conditions prior to development). This is a direct reflection of the site’s characteristic breeziness, even if no development were to occur. Similar results are expected on amenity levels. The location of points not meeting the 7-mph criterion will not necessarily be the same for both PLW conditions due to the presence of the project. The number of points that do not meet the 11-mph criterion is expected to be less than one-half the number of points that do not meet the 7-mph criterion. For a similarly configured project on Keeaumoku Street, less than one-third of the points at the ground level did not meet the 11-mph criterion. Most of these points were located mid-site along the streets shielded by the building from prevailing wind. At the elevated amenity level, few of the points did not meet the 11-mph criterion. Most of these points were located on the unshielded north and northwest corners of the building. We have noted on other projects with the primary street located perpendicular to the prevailing wind, which is the opposite condition found on the proposed site, that there was relatively more acceleration on the side that would be considered shielded from the prevailing breeze than we have seen for sites similarly situated to the proposed project. The orientation of these other projects relative to the prevailing wind and the configuration of fronting street suggest that these sites will be perceived as gustier compared to sites located to the north (such as for the proposed project) where there is a greater proportion of open space compared to building structures. As a result, some points that satisfy the 11-mph criterion based on mean wind speed will not satisfy the 2x11-mph criterion when gusting is considered. Points that do not meet the 11-mph criteria are expected to be directly adjacent to the site or on-site; off-site effects are not expected to extend a significant distance beyond the project boundaries. Nearly all points are expected to satisfy the 15-mph criterion. Points that do not satisfy the 15-mph criterion are anticipated to occur in selected locations around the site perimeter. Other wind tunnel PLW studies suggest that it is unlikely that there will be many points that exceed the 15-mph criterion on the elevated recreation deck, although the location of the amenity decks for the proposed project place them on the unshielded corner of the project. It is anticipated that there will be no points that come close to exceeding the hazard condition (i.e., 10% mean exceedance speed of 36 mph). Downwashing winds impinging on the amenity levels from the tower facades are expected to be slowed by the presence of balconies on most of the towers’ facades. The amenity deck may experience higher wind speeds as prevailing winds are redirected down and around the towers as the corners do not have balconies. Ultimately, the location of the amenity decks relative to the prevailing winds may have the biggest impact on wind speed, but it is expected that this impact will be mitigated by the shelter provided by the one-story structure to the north and east of the pool area. These factors are not expected to significantly increase wind speeds beyond the boundaries of the site.


95

The height difference between Scheme 1 and Scheme 2 is not expected to significantly influence the PLW results in one scheme compared to the other. The presence of the Scheme 1 mid-rise structure may increase stagnation and reduce wind speeds on the portions of the amenity decks closest to the towers (e.g., the pool) and provide additional shielding of the ground level. The “bottlenecks” produced in Scheme 1 by the relatively small separation between the mid-rise structure and the adjacent towers may result in localized instances of faster wind speeds. Scheme 2 may experience relatively increased wind speeds due to the absence of the mid-rise structure. The complex interaction between project elements and the wind and the difficulty in predicting the resulting behavior is an important reason why wind tunnel studies for PLW assessment are recommended for projects of this type. 3.4 Pedestrian-Level Wind Mitigation As noted above, the design of the facade, siting of the recreation deck relative to the towers, and the sheltering of the pool are mitigated the effect of the wind at pedestrian levels. Nevertheless, mitigation options, such as landscaping and screening, may be required for windier points. Although not modeled directly in most wind tunnel studies, landscaping around the tower would be expected to reduce the wind speeds. Landscaping must be relatively dense to provide effective protection. Maintenance of existing mature street trees, or installation of similar trees as a part of the project is one way of reducing the impact of higher wind speeds and gusting around the building perimeter. Overly flexible planting can itself be distracting if it moves too much in the wind. Vertical and horizontal screening may also help reduce the wind speed. Vertical screening that is opaque to the wind (e.g., a glass wall) generally creates a protected area that is twice as deep as the screen is tall, whereas open screening is less effective. Screening that is 50% open will protect an area that is generally no deeper than the height of the screen. In addition to the overhangs around the building, stationary umbrellas may be able to provide localized protection from vertically oriented wind. Definitive advice regarding mitigation strategies is difficult to provide in the absence of wind tunnel testing that investigates specific mitigation measures. One important reason for this is that acceleration of the wind is a function of many factors, including, but not limited to, the direction of prevailing winds, the presence of adjacent buildings, and the relative mix of wind washing down the face of the building vs. channeled wind. Thus, strategies that rely on blocking prevailing wind may not prove as effective as intuition would suggest. Observation of the wind in other Honolulu locations may provide insight as to whether the wind speeds are unduly objectionable. The windiest points are expected to correspond to


96

typical open (unprotected) sites in the Honolulu area, while the balance of the windy points is expected to correspond to typical suburban (developed) sites in the Honolulu area. The warmer climate in Honolulu may increase pedestrian tolerance somewhat to otherwise objectionable wind speeds, although some objectionable aspects of faster wind speeds are not necessarily related to temperature (e.g., movement of napkins and partially filled cups). If accessibility requirements limit the maximum force needed to open a door, mechanical door openers may be required in areas where faster wind speeds are anticipated.”

Respect Historical Landmarks (Section 5.8.3) The Project Site is not located near any historical landmarks and its development will not impact historical landmarks described in the TOD plan.

Ensure Interaction with Adjacent Buildings (Section 5.8.4) To promote sidewalk orientation and a vibrant district character, buildings close to each other should interact with each other through their building frontages. These frontages should:

Allow direct building access during business hours Contain at least one public entrance on the street Provide a public entrance per street front on corner buildings

The Project Site fronts on three streets and has three neighboring parcels. The Rycroft Street neighbor has a driveway and the side of the building adjoining the Project Site. There is also a yard and open space area. The Project’s driveway will be adjacent to this neighbor, and the open space on both lots will frame both ends of the block. On Liona Street, the neighboring property has ground floor parking adjacent to the Project Site and will adjoin this Project’s driveway. The Project will have public entrances on the three street frontages, Keeaumoku, Rycroft, and Liona Street. Building Orientation to Street & Public Spaces (Section 5.8.5) To sustain street-level activity and promote pedestrian traffic, buildings should be oriented to the street and public spaces. This orientation should include:

Pedestrian design elements along building frontages Tenant spaces oriented to the street and public spaces


97

Retail storefronts along streets and public spaces Open air seating at ground-level restaurants Wide sidewalks and support amenities (e.g. waste bins, lighting) Storefront transparency at ground level Human-scaled architectural features (awnings, canopies, overhangs) that help

activate storefronts

The Project will improve the pedestrian experience by providing a park/plaza near the entry/exit to the motor court on Rycroft Street and wider sidewalks that blend into the park/plaza area, which will create wide pedestrian walkways along Keeaumoku Street. The new urban park/plaza will complement this urban community and add to the usable open space on the site. This public open space will provide respite from the pace of the city and provide cool, contemplative spaces for social gatherings. Tenant spaces located in the front (west side of the towers) will be oriented toward Keeaumoku Street and sidewalk with high transparency at the ground level. Outdoor dining is planned along Keeaumoku Street. Detailed designs will focus on activating these storefronts and streetscape with human-scaled elements. The Applicant plans to provide waste bins for public use and a large scale meandering bench will provide a variety of seating options. Provide Pedestrian-Oriented Streetscape (Section 5.8.6) A preferable streetscape alignment includes:

Street trees and planting zones along the curb Sidewalks set back against the building A clear differentiation of 1) curb line/planting areas, 2) middle walking areas, and

3) building face/display, and outdoor seating areas At its base, the Project will create pedestrian-friendly sidewalks with continuously activated street-level frontages culminating in a public-benefit park/plaza at the entry exit to the motor court on Rycroft Street. Landscape features of the park/plaza include new shade trees, a variety of planted areas, planter boxes, and unique informal seating. Reduce Visual Impact of Vehicular Circulation (Section 5.8.7) Parking should be designed to limit its impacts on the public realm by:

Reducing the number of curb cuts on pedestrian-oriented streets Limiting parking entrances on pedestrian oriented streets Limiting the visibility of parking facilities from the street


98

At the present time there two curb cuts each on Rycroft and Liona Street. The Applicant plans to not have any curb cuts on Keeaumoku Street. We will increase the curb cuts on Liona Street from two to three. The curb cuts on Rycroft Street will remain at two. Each of the existing curb cuts provided parking and/or loading entrances. The parking podium will be screened from view by louvered screens. Screen/Buffer Service & Loading Facilities From Public Streets (Section 5.8.8)

Service and loading facilities, while essential to commercial activities, detract from the public realm. Their impact on pedestrian-oriented areas can be reduced by:

Placing facilities away from sidewalks amenity spaces Incorporating equipment architecturally, where applicable Screening facilities with walls or landscaping

Service and loading facilities will be situated to the interior of the lot, away from sidewalk amenity spaces and appropriately screened by storefronts and lobbies. Equipment will also be located on the interior of the lot and screened from view. Avoid Blank Walls (Section 5.8.9) Blank walls are not desirable and can be avoided through:

Placement of active uses and entries along public spaces and streets Maintaining a required amount of transparency at the street level Incorporation of public art where appropriate

The Applicant has placed active uses such as the park/plaza and seat walls to create gathering areas in and around public spaces. The Applicant will provide 75% transparency at the street level. The Applicant may incorporate public art where appropriate. 12.5.8. Tall Building Guidelines (Section 5.9) Design Guidelines for the Base, Middle & Top of Tower (Section 5.9.2) Design principles should be established for each building section to address how:

The base will affect people’s experience of the building at street level The middle of the building will affect the building’s shadows or the urban

environment


99

The tower will affect the building’s aesthetic and experiential contribution to the urban skyline

The overall theme of the building design will provide to iconic towers that will move the Project into an updated design that pays respect to the natural features of the area. The street level or base will include improved and widened sidewalks improving the pedestrian experience. The anticipated shadow impacts are provide in Section Section 12.3.7.5.. The towers will be oriented in the mauka-makai direction to minimize impacts on mauka-makai views. The building is designed to be aesthetic to the pedestrian on the ground floor and from the upper floors of surrounding buildings. The building’s overall massing, materials, and colors scheme would be consistent with surrounding area. The Project will have two towers designed to promote natural air circulation to mitigate impacts to wind and shadowing on the streets. Sidewalks and walkways would have landscaping to improve the pedestrian experience and the frontage of the building would have front and back public entrances. The lobbies, social gathering places, recreation spaces, are all located within this space and encourages interaction between visitors and locals. The proposed Project will be designed to provide rich visual textures, landscapes, and materials typically found in the vicinity that is recognizable with a symbolic relationship to Hawai‘i’s environment, people, and/or culture. Promote Natural Air Circulation & Ventilation While Minimizing Adverse Wind Conditions Tall buildings have the ability to capture natural breezes that can provide benefits through reduced energy consumption and higher indoor air quality. Tower design should also evaluate wind tunnelling impacts that may have negative effects at the street level. At minimum, a 100’ dimension should be maintained between tall buildings to preserve views and solar access. A “Preliminary Wind Study” has been prepared for the Project by Englekirk Structural Engineers. A copy of the wind assessment is provided in Appendix IX. Excerpts from the wind study are provided in Section 12.5.7.Architectural Character Guidelines (Section 5.8) of this application. The tower, will meet the 50–foot recommended spacing on its east property boundary.


100

Provide Proper Setbacks for Towers Tower placement is key to ensuring the public realm remains a comfortable environment. By setting back upper stories in towers away from street frontages, parks, trees, or open spaces, the perceived impact of the tower on the urban environment can be significantly reduced. For example, along Kapiolani Boulevard, a 20’ setback from the property line above the first story can provide room for the street’s Monkeypod trees. The Applicant has provided a 15-foot setback at the ground level along Keeaumoku Street. Orient Towers in Mauka-Makai Direction Mauka-makai view corridors may be impacted by new tower development in the Ala Moana district. Tall buildings should orient themselves in a mauka-makai direction makai of Makaloa Street to preserve view corridors in the public realm, as well as to create mauka-makai visual connections for people at street level and those occupying tall buildings. The Project’s siting and orientation is intended to strongly address Keeaumoku Street while utilizing the height limit and density. The tower is oriented in a mauka-makai direction to minimize impacts to the corridors viewpoints. The proposed Project is not expected to obstruct the views of shorelines and other viewpoints as the current area views are obstructed by existing buildings and structures.

12.6. IMPLEMENTATION The Applicant will be one of the private sector partners that will do his part in implementing this TOD plan by following its guidelines in developing the Project to help create a transit-oriented community as described throughout this TOD plan. The Applicant will also provide community benefits in support of the transit-oriented community.

13. PLANS We are providing one set of each of the following plans (11" x 17" and a maximum of 24" x 36") in Appendix I: Site Plan; Preliminary Floor Plans and Area Calculations; Exterior Elevations and Sections; Open Space Plans and Area Calculations; Parking and Loading Plans and Calculations; and Preliminary Landscape Plan.

14. PHOTOS Aerial photos and photos taken from nearby public viewing areas are provided in Appendix X.


101

15. BMX-3 COMMUNITY BUSINESS DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS

Development Standard Standard Project Minimum lot area (square feet) 5,000 153,884 Minimum lot width and depth (feet) 50’ 540’ effective width &

265’ effective depth Yards (feet) – Front - Side

10’ for dwellings 5’ for other uses 5 for detached dwellings 10 for multifamily dwellings 0 for other uses

15’ (Keeaumoku) 5’ (Rycroft) 5’ (Liona) 0’ (east)

Maximum Density (FAR) 538,594 (3.5 FAR)

1,077,188 square feet (7.0 FAR - TOD)

Open Space Bonus Max FAR

5 sf/1 sf of public open space 3 sf/1 sf of arcade 3.5 FAR

33,265 sf

Maximum Height (feet) 150 feet per zoning map 400 feet (TOD) Height Setback For each 10 feet of additional

height or portion thereof (over 40 feet), an additional one-foot setback must be provided

Complies except along Keeaumoku Street (See Appendix I – Elevation – Rycroft an Liona Street)

The Project will meet the minimum lot area, lot width and depth front and side yard, and height setback requirements. The Project will meet the maximum floor area and height requirement and will be building, in accordance with the Ala Moana Neighborhood TOD Plan to an FAR of 7.0 (maximum allowable FAR is 7.0) and a height of 400 feet (maximum height for the Keeaumoku Corridor is 400 feet with community benefits). 16. RESOLUTION NO. 19-224, CD1

The following describes the Project’s compliance with the conditions of Resolution No. 19-224 CD1: A. The maximum permitted floor area ratio ("FAR") for the Project is 7.0 (1,077,188 square

feet). B. The maximum permitted height of the Project is 400 feet. Rooftop structures must conform

to LUO Section 21-4.60(c).


102

C. Encroachments into the Keeaumoku Street height setback are permitted as shown in the conceptual plan, up to a maximum of 15 feet; provided that the parking structure must not encroach into any setback, height setback, or transitional height setback.

D. The minimum number of vehicle off-street parking spaces for the Project is 842 spaces. The

maximum number of vehicle off-street parking spaces for the Project is 1,571 spaces. E. A minimum of 225 vehicle off-street parking spaces must be unbundled. Unbundled parking

spaces may be sold or leased for periods not to exceed 10 years; provided that parking spaces must be sold to a single private management company, the Project's association of apartment owners, or similar organization.

F. The Applicant shall comply with the affordable housing requirement pursuant to Ordinance

18-10 ("AHR"), and the DPP's AHR rules adopted thereunder, including the room factor calculation. For-sale AHR units must remain affordable for a minimum of 30 years. AHR units must be evenly distributed throughout the Project and must not be concentrated and located solely on the lowest residential floors. If, after applying the room factor, additional AHR units are required to comply with the AHR, the additional required AHR units must not be created by dividing previously proposed AHR units into more dwelling units. Applicant's compliance with this condition will be confirmed at the time the Project's final affordable housing agreement is approved, which must be prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy ("CO") for the Project.

G. The Applicant shall provide the following community benefits:

1. In addition to complying with the AHR of Ordinance 18-10 (as approved by the DPP), the Applicant shall provide as a community benefit at least an additional five percent of the total number of dwelling units in the Project as affordable to households earning 120 percent or below of the area median income ("AMI") for Honolulu, to remain affordable for a minimum of 30 years (the "affordable community benefit units" or "ACB units"). All ACB units must be evenly distributed throughout the Project and must not be concentrated and located solely on the lowest residential floors. If the total number of residential dwelling units in the Project changes from 964, five percent of all dwelling units will be required as ACB units. Application of the DPP's AHR rules, including the room factor calculation, is required. If, after applying the room factor, additional ACB units are required, the additional required ACB units must not be created by dividing previously proposed ACB units into more dwelling units.

Applicant's compliance with this condition will be confirmed at the time the Project's final

affordable housing agreement is approved, which must be prior to the issuance of any CO for the Project. The Applicant shall use good faith efforts to sell the ACB units. If the Applicant is not able to sell all ACB units to buyers of qualified households within a reasonable marketing period, the Applicant may request that the DPP Director approve a


103

reduction of the 30-year affordability period for the remaining ACB units, and any such reduction approved by the DPP Director will be considered a minor modification allowed under this resolution.

2. A public park with at least 26,000 square feet of park area. The park will not count towards

park dedication requirements, and at a minimum must be publicaly accessible during similar hours as City parks maintained by the Department of Parks and Recreation. The Applicant shall develop a park programming schedule with a minimum of six programmed public events annually.

3. Public outdoor dining areas with at least 3,000 square feet of total area. Tables, sitting

walls, benches, and chairs in the outdoor dining areas must be available for use by the general public.

4. A minimum of 10 car share spaces and vehicles located on the Project site. The car share

spaces must be publicly accessible at all times. Adequate wayfinding signage is required to direct the general public to the car share spaces. Car share spaces will not count towards the maximum off-street parking requirements specified in Condition D if they are available to the general public 24-hours per day.

5. A bicycle sharing station with a minimum of 20 docking spaces, or as otherwise deemed appropriate by the applicable City bicycle sharing partner. The bicycle sharing station must be conveniently located on the Project site and must be publicly accessible. The Applicant shall fund, construct, and provide space for the bicycle sharing station and all bicycles through an agreement with Bikeshare Hawaii, or other current City bicycle sharing partner.

6. Right-of-way ("ROW") improvements and maintenance, including planter boxes with landscape materials, rock walls, sit walls, benches, and chairs, in addition to standard ROW improvement required under the LUO.

7. A $168,000 cash contribution to the City to fund, in coordination with nearby IPD-T projects, complete streets improvements within the Ala Moana TOD special district, such as a bicycle lane on Keeaumoku Street, or other improvements intended to improve the complete streets network.

8. Adoption of an existing or new bus stop. The Applicant shall maintain an existing bus stop or, if deemed necessary by the City Department of Transportation Services ("DTS"), the Applicant shall coordinate with the DTS to adopt, design, and build a new bus stop and shelter on the Project site.

9. Traffic demand management ("TDM") measures to encourage use of alternate

transportation modes, including free, reduced fare, or reimbursement for transit passes for


104

some employees and residents of the Project until December 31, 2026, and incentives for bicycling or walking to minimize the number of vehicular trips for daily activities of residents and employees.

10. A 1,500-square-foot community center in the commercial portion of the Project. The community center must be open to the public and available for public use.

H. The Applicant shall include as a part of its IPD-T special district permit application, updated plans showing: 1. Transparent building facades or pedestrian-oriented improvements benches, sitting walls,

outdoor dining areas, shade trees) up to the build-to lines for 70 percent of the frontage along Keeaumoku Street, and 50 percent of the frontages along Liona and Rycroft Streets. The park and Keeaumoku Street must be activated by providing pedestrian entrances for residents of both towers along the Keeaumoku Street facades, and a pedestrian entrance for residents to the park area.

2. Parking structure design and layout demonstrating compliance with all setbacks, height

setbacks, and transitional height setbacks required in Condition C, and with the maximum number of off-street parking established in Condition D.

3. Landscaping and screening as required under LUO Section 21-4.70(c). The parking

structure must be screened from the existing dwellings north and east of the Project site, and vertical-form trees must be installed within the side yard, with minimum spacing of 10 feet on center.

4. Details of the type, location, and rack types for the 141 short-term and 490 long-term

bicycle parking spaces. All short-term spaces must be located on the ground floor near entrances to the buildings or gathering areas such as the park. Seven long-term spaces provided for commercial uses must be located on the ground floor within the parking deck. Remaining long-term spaces may be located throughout the parking structure, must be located near the elevators or, if on the second floor, near the ramp.

The bicycle rack system that is initially installed must satisfy 50 percent of the required

bicycle parking spaces. All sales brochures must disclose total number of bike parking stalls and developer will be required to provide on demand up to the maximum bike parking stalls (remaining 50% of requirement).

5. Bicycle sharing station location and details as required in Condition G.5.

6. Updated floor plans showing AHR unit and ACB unit calculations, and the location and

unit type mix for AHR units and ACB units in compliance with Condition F and Condition G.1.


105

7. Details relating to ROW improvements, including the placement and design of all ROW improvements as required in Condition G.6.

8. Revised and detailed park plans showing park design and the active programming of open

spaces as required under Condition G.2. 9. Details of materials, finish, and color used for sidewalks within the Project site. Sidewalk

materials, finish, and color must be consistent across the entire Project frontage, including any driveways to signal pedestrian priority, with preference for the City's standard brushed concrete material and finish. Material colors must match the City's concrete sidewalk to avoid incongruous patchwork effects and allow for easy repairs.

10. Details regarding the number and location of the car share spaces required under

Condition G.4. 11. The bicycle and pedestrian circulation plan required under Condition L.3.

I. The Applicant shall obtain a building permit for the AHR units and ACB units prior to the

issuance of a certificate of occupancy ("CO") for the Project's market rate units.

J. Prior to the submission of a grading permit application for the Project, the Applicant shall submit to the DPP an archaeological inventory survey ("AIS") report that has been approved by the State Historic Preservation Division ("SHPD"). The Applicant shall implement the approved mitigation protocols identified in the AIS report for all cultural resources, including iwi, discovered on the Project site.

K. Prior to the submission of a foundation permit application for the Project, the Applicant shall submit to the DPP an updated wind study and wind tunnel test to quantify the wind conditions and evaluate the effectiveness of any wind mitigation strategies for public areas or areas designated for the public park. The updated wind study must determine the impact of the parking structure on nearby apartment buildings, which may experience a tunnel downwash effect. The Applicant shall implement the recommendations of the wind study.

L. Prior to the issuance of any building permit for the Project, the Applicant shall submit the

following to the DPP for review and approval. 1. A timeline with anticipated dates for obtaining major building permits for demolition and

construction work, and the expected date of occupancy. The timeline must identify submission dates for a construction management plan ("CMP"), traffic management plan ("TMP"), and updates to or validation of the findings of the traffic impact report ("TIR") dated October 2018.

2. A CMP that:


106

a. Identifies the type, frequency, and routing of heavy trucks and construction related

vehicles, and provides remedial measures, as needed; b. Identifies and limits construction-related vehicular activity to non- peak periods of

traffic, using alternate routes for heavy trucks, and providing for on-site or off-site staging areas for construction workers and vehicles;

c. Includes preliminary or conceptual traffic control plans; and d. Includes documentation of the condition of roadways prior to the start of construction

activities – the Applicant shall restore roadways to their original or improved condition upon completion of Project construction.

3. A TMP that includes TDM strategies to limit vehicular trips for daily activities of Project

residents and employees, and large events held in the Project's public areas. Strategies must include incentives to encourage transit use, bicycling, and walking, including offering some residents and employees free, reduced fare, or reimbursement for transit passes until December 31, 2026. The TMP must also include a bicycle and pedestrian circulation plan ("BPCP"), which must show required sidewalk widths, curb specifications, furniture, and pedestrian areas pursuant to the City's Complete Streets Manual. A post TMP will be required approximately one year after the issuance of a CO for the Project. The post TMP must validate the relative effectiveness of the various TDM strategies identified in the initial report.

4. An updated TIR, or a separate TIR, to evaluate the impact of the Project on nearby traffic. The Applicant shall coordinate the updated TIR with the DTS and the DPP. The updated TIR must: a. Include a pedestrian and multi-modal analysis;

b. Address compliance with complete streets design concepts and standards, particularly with respect to street intersections;

c. Be expanded to include the intersections of Kaheka and Liona Streets, and Kaheka and

King Streets;

d. Include an analysis of corner rounding at the intersections of Rycroft and Keeaumoku Streets, and Liona and Keeaumoku Streets, to accommodate a standard 28-foot curb radius at these intersections; and


107

e. Provide for porte cochere designs that prevent overflow onto the right-of-ways, and porte cochere widths that allow a moving vehicle to safely pass a stationary vehicle.

A post TIR will be required approximately one year after the issuance of the CO. The post TIR must validate the traffic projections, distribution, and assignment contained in the initial TIR. The Applicant shall implement the recommendations of the post TIR, in coordination with the DPP.

5. A draft affordable housing agreement ("Agreement") that must be approved by the DPP. Upon execution, the Applicant shall record the Agreement with the Bureau of Conveyances of the State of Hawaii or the Office of the Assistant Registrar of the Land Court of the State of Hawaii, or both, as appropriate.

6. A street tree plan that has been reviewed and approved by the Department of Parks and Recreation ("DPR").

M. The Applicant shall be responsible for coordinating construction of the Project with applicable governmental agencies, and ensuring that the Project complies with all applicable laws and regulations.

N. The Applicant shall be responsible for the maintenance of all constructed improvements not otherwise accepted by the City or State for maintenance.

O. Approval of this IPD-T Permit does not constitute compliance with LUO or other governmental agency requirements, including building permit approvals. They are subject to separate review and approval. The Applicant shall be responsible for ensuring that the final plans for the Project comply with all applicable LUO and other governmental provisions and requirements.

P. The Applicant shall obtain a building permit for the Project within five years after the date of issuance of a major special district permit for the Project. Failure to obtain a building permit within this period will render null and void this resolution and all approvals issued hereunder; provided that this period may be extended as follows:

1. The DPP Director may extend this period if the Applicant demonstrates good cause, but the period must not be extended beyond one year from the initial deadline without the approval of the City Council, which may grant or deny the approval in its complete discretion.

2. If the Applicant requests an extension beyond one year from the initial deadline and the DPP Director finds that the Applicant has demonstrated good cause for the extension, the Director shall prepare and submit to the Council a report on the proposed extension, which should include the Director’s findings and recommendations thereon, and a proposed


108

an extension for a shorter or longer period, or deny the proposed extension, by resolution. 3. If the Council fails to take final action on the proposed extension within the first to occur

of: (i) 60 days after receipt of the DPP Director’s report, or (ii) the applicant’s then-existing deadline for obtaining a building permit; the extension is deemed denied.

Q. The Project must conform to the conceptual plan approved hereby and all conditions established herein. Any changes to the conceptual plan will require a new application and approval by the Council. The DPP Director may approve changes to the Project that do not significantly alter the size or nature of the Project, if the changes remain in conformance with the conceptual plan and the conditions herein. Any increase in height or density of the Project will be considered a significant alteration and a change to the conceptual plan; and

17. SEA LEVEL RISE

Climate change is considered a threat to all coastal areas. Planning for climate change and sea level rise (SLR) is challenging as there are multiple variables and changing and unknown factors. Research indicates that greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, including carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and fluorinated gases, are a key contributor to the unprecedented increases in global atmospheric warming over the past century (USEPA, 2011 and IPRC, 2013). University of Hawai‘i (UH) researchers have documented the effects of climate change in Hawai‘i, as air temperatures have risen; rain intensity has increased while total rainfall has decreased; stream flows have decreased; sea surface temperatures and sea levels have increased; and the ocean is becoming more acidic (IPRC, 2013, var. and SB No. 2745, 2012). These trends are projected to continue to increase in the future, which poses unique and considerable challenges to Hawai‘i. It is estimated that sea level has risen in Hawai‘i by approximately 0.6 inches per decade (1.5 millimeter per year) over the past century (SOEST, 2012). The estimates point to a potential aggregate SLR of 1.3 feet (40 centimeter) by the year 2060 and a rise of 3.3 feet (100 centimeter) by 2110 (SOEST, 2012). The Hawai‘i State Legislature passed a law (SB 2745) in 2012 that amended the State Planning Act to include climate change as one of the State’s priority guidelines. In 2014, the Hawai‘i State legislature passed the Hawai‘i Climate Adaptation Initiative Act (Act 83, 2014), codified as HRS, Chapter 225P, which established an Interagency Climate Adaptation Committee (ICAC). The purpose of Act 83 is to address the effects of climate change by implementing a climate adaption plan. On June 6, 2017, Governor David Ige signed Act 32, Session Laws of Hawai‘i, which amended HRS, Chapter 225P by renaming the ICAC to the Hawai‘i Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission (“Commission”). The Commission published the Hawai i Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Report (“SLR Report”) in December 2017, which included recommendations on how to reduce exposure and increase adaptability to the impacts of SLR. Research within the SLR Report notes that the intensity and frequency of natural disasters have increased and will continue to do so, and further provides technical projections of areas along the coast that are vulnerable to SLR based on the latest available science. The SLR Report includes


109

recommendations to address risks associated with climate change. The SLR Report found that a SLR of 3.2 feet and the associated erosion, flooding, and waves inundation, will have significant impacts to O ahu’s building and land values, residents and infrastructure. Portions of O ahu that are vulnerable to the SLR are illustrated on the Hawai i Sea Level Rise Viewer (“Viewer”), an online interactive map created in conjunction with the SLR Report. Specifically, the Viewer defines an area called the SLR exposure area (SLR-XA), which is the projected extent of chronic flooding due to SLR (PacIOOS, 2018). The Project Site is not located in a coastal area (located 0.4 miles from the shoreline), nor is it located within the 3.2 feet SLR-XA. Based on Guidance from the Honolulu Climate Change Commission, the City and County of Honolulu has found that a planning benchmark of six feet of sea level rise (SLR) is appropriate for projects with a life span beyond mid- century, and for critical infrastructure. High tide flooding and nuisance flooding may be present and precede global mean SLR by decades. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administrators (NOAA) have come up with a viewer to view impacted areas at different levels of sea level rise. At six feet the Project Site will not be affected by sea level rise. See Appendix XI, Sea Level Rise Exposure Area.


APPENDIX I

CONCEPTUAL PLANS

THE PARK ON KEEAUMOKUAla Moana Special District Permit - Design Package

04/01/2020

N

1

1

2

2

3

3

EXISTING RETAIL ~90,000 SF

EXISTING SITE CONDITION

074, 075

25% of Site Area = 38,471 sf30% of Site Area = 46,165 sf

Per LUO Sec. 21-3.120-2 (6) BMX-3 Open Space Bonusa) For every 1 sf of public open space provided, 5 sf offloor space may be added, exclusive of required yards.

6

400'

PROPERTY INFOMATION

1

2

3

SUN, WIND AND VIEWS

SECTIONS

A

B

SECTION A -KEEAUMOKU STREETALONG BUILDING A

SECTION B -KEEAUMOKU STREETALONG GREAT LAWN

PLANT PALATTE

BRIDGE TO PARKING AT FLRS 3-14

A

A

B

B

FACING LIONA AND AHANA ST


APPENDIX II

AFFIDAVIT AND ALA MOANA/KAKAAKO NEIGHBORHOOD BOARD MINUTES

ALA MOANA-KAKA‘AKO NEIGHBORHOOD BOARD NO. 11_____c/o NEIGHBORHOOD COMMISSION 925 DILLINGHAM BOULEVARD, SUITE 160 HONOLULU, HAWAII, 96817

PHONE (808) 768-3710 FAX (808) 768-3711 INTERNET http:///www.honolulu.gov/nco

Oahu’s Neighborhood Board system – Established 1973

DRAFT REGULAR MEETING MINUTESTUESDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2018MAKIKI CHRISTIAN CHURCH

CALL TO ORDER – Chair Ryan Tam called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. Quorum was established with eight(8) members present. Note – This nine (9)-member Board requires five (5) members to establish quorum and totake official Board action. Chair Tam welcomed attendees to the October 2018 regular monthly meeting of the Ala

to promote citizen participation in the government's decision-making process.

ROLL CALL – William Ammons, Rodney Chang, Lynn Mariano, Ryan Tam, K. Russell Ho (Neighborhood Assistant),Jayne Cloutier, Susan Oppie, Chris Chung, and Ron Komine, Jr.

Board Members Absent – Michael Zehner.

Vacancies – There were no vacancies.

Guests – Cindy McMillian (Governor David Ige's Representative, Director of Communications); Representative TomBrower and staff member (Representative Tom Bower's Office), Deputy Director Ian Santee (Mayor Kirk Caldwell'sRepresentative, Honolulu Emergency Services Department); Councilmember Ann Kobayashi, CouncilmemberCarol Fukunaga, Kenny Amazaki (Councilmember Trevor Ozawa's Office), Acting Captain Casey Ferreira (HonoluluFire Department); Lieutenant Baron Lee and Sergeant Clinton Corpuz (Honolulu Police Department, District 1); Jay

Girem Yoo, and Yulee Kim (Nan Inc.); Sunik Ham (CUZCO Development); Sia Khorrami; Steve Teves, ChaseKersten, and Vernon Kinoshita (Design Partners, Inc. [DPI]); Carol Thamtrachai and Rose Wall (Sandalwood),

Langham, Joan and Michael Mishima, Jess Treat (Keauhou Lane), Mary McGovern (Keauhou Lane), Mary andIrene Toba, Pat Lee (Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation), Dee Dee Letts (Judiciary), Sharon Moriwaki(Kaka -MoOfferdahl, Renee Espiau (Department of Planning and Permitting, Ala Moana Transit-Oriented Development),Lauren Martinez (Integrated Multimedia Consultants), and K. Russell Ho (Neighborhood Commission Office).

PUBLIC SAFETY REPORTS

October 2018 Fire Statistics – There were 2 structure and 2 nuisance fires, which include fires outside astructure or vehicle, and 15 activated alarms (no fires); 178 medical emergencies, 3 motor vehicle collisionswith pedestrians, 3 motor vehicle crashes/collisions, and 2 ocean rescues.Fire Safety Tip: Halloween Safety – When selecting a costume, stay away from long, trailing fabric, as itcan be a trip hazard or attach to an object and cause a fall. If you create your own costume, select materialsthat would not easily ignite, if it comes into contact with heat or flame. If your child is wearing a mask, ensurethe eye holes are large enough so they can see out. Provide children with flashlights for lighting or glowsticks as part of their costume. It is safest to use a flashlight or battery-operated candle in a jack-o-lantern.The Honolulu Fire Department discourages the use of candles.

Comments followed: Air Horn – Cloutier lives at Rycroft and Kaheka Streets and complained that a firefighter usedan air horn eight (8) times in two (2) blocks from Kaheka Street to King Street in a high-density district, when therewas no visible traffic. Acting Captain Ferreira noted that sirens and lights are mandated by law in an emergencyand suggested that she file a complaint with the HFD Administration with the details. Cloutier added that theambulances use lights only at nights. Acting Captain Ferreira repeated his suggestions.

Honolulu Police Department (HPD) District 1 – Lieutenant Baron Lee introduced Sergeant Clinton Corpuz andreported the following:

DRAFT REGULAR MEETING MINUTES PAGE 2 OF 10

September 2018/August 2018 Statistics – There were 10/11 motor vehicle thefts, 10/12 burglaries, 141/127thefts, 25/24 unauthorized entries into motor vehicles (UEMV) or break-ins, 14/23 assaults, 7/2 sexassaults, 1/2 graffiti incidents, and 13/13 drug offenses. There were 6,337/6,605 calls for service. Morestatistics can be found on the HPD website at – www.honolulupd.org.Safety Tip – Halloween Safety: If children are wearing customs, be sure they are not trip hazards and safe.Parents or responsible adults should always accompany young children on their neighborhood routes.Teach children how to call 911 in the event that they have an emergency. If older children are going outalone, plan and review the route that is acceptable to you and agree on a specific time when they aresupposed to be returning home. Go only to homes with porch lights lit and never enter a home or a vehicle.Remind trick-or-treaters to remain on the sidewalk and do not run across the street because pedestrianinjuries are the most common to children on Halloween. If no sidewalks are available and you are crossingthe street, walk at the far edge of the roadway facing traffic. Only cross the street in established crosswalks.Avoid crossing between parked vehicles. Carry a flashlight and wear reflective clothing. Parents orresponsible adults should always inspect the candy before it is eaten and check the wrappers for possibletampering. If you have any type of suspicious candy at risk of being tampered with, call 911.

Comments followed:1. Statistics on Moped Violations – Oppie asked about noisy moped citations. Lieutenant Lee noted that HPD

does not track noisy moped violations, as mopeds are difficult to catch, because they are so elusive.Lieutenant Lee suggested calling the Community Policing Team at 529-3691 for the community trafficawareness program (CTAP).

2. Bicycles and Mopeds on the Sidewalk – Mariano was concerned about bicycles, mopeds, and Biki bikeson the sidewalks instead of in the bike lanes, as he sees people in wheelchairs dodging bicycles and heuses a walking stick. Lieutenant Lee suggested calling 911, but he already explained the difficulty incatching the violators. Patrol officers will address this more in business districts, where bicycles and mopedsare not allowed on the sidewalks, as in the residential districts.

3. Lights on Bicycles at Night – Chung was concerned about lights on bicycles. Lieutenant Lee said thatheadlights and taillights are required at nights. Chair Tam asked what the citation was. Lieutenant Leethought it may be $35.00.

ELECTED OFFICIALS

Mayor Kirk Caldwell's Representative – Deputy Director Ian Santee, Honolulu Emergency Services Department(HESD) reported the following:

that disrupted the area for a long time. What happened? Board of Water Supply (BWS) responded that themain break on Kapiolani Boulevard was closed off due to damage caused by a contractor to the 12-inchwater main line. Because of the damage to the line and the condition of the road surface, that area neededto be completely closed to ensure not only the safety of the BWS crew members and HPD officers, but thepublic as well that normally travel that corridor. We understand that these breaks create an inconvenienceto everyone, and appreciate everyone’s patience during the repair.Regarding the BWS Reports – BWS: As Neighborhood Board meetings occur throughout the month, thetimeliness of the information will vary from Board to Board. We understand that, by the time the Septembermain breaks are reported to this Board, it is almost October.Pedestrian Island at Sheridan Street and Kapi – Department of Facility Maintenance (DFM)has been in discussion with DTS, regarding the construction of the requested pedestrian island and hassuggested modifications to the initial plans to incorporate newer curb and delineator systems that havebeen more resilient to vehicle damage versus the asphalt berms that were requested. The pedestrian islandis scheduled to be completed by the end of the calendar year 2018. The newer curb system thatincorporates delineators attached to the curbing was selected and is being purchased for installation at thislocation. The asphalt berms have not been as resilient to vehicle contact as evidenced by frequentmaintenance of the berms at the King Street cycle track.Parcel of Land Next to the Kewalo "Like-the-Look" Lab – There was a question in regards to the parcel ofland next to the Kewalo "Like-the-Look" lab or the proposed President Obama Library site. Division of LandManagement (DLM) responded: In May 2018, the Hawaii Community Development Authority (HCDA) Boardof Directors approved an action to transfer various HCDA parcels, including the Waterfront Park, remnantroads, and the Children’s Discovery Center to the City. Included in the package of parcels to be transferredis the Look Lab site. The City is conducting due diligence on the transfer parcels at this time to review thecurrent condition of the lands and any issues that may need to be resolved prior to transfer. Department of


Planning and Permitting (DPP): The Kaka waterfront site is under the jurisdiction of the State of Hawaii,HCDA. The HCDA is charged with planning for and managing this land.Adding Two Floors to Low-rise Apartment Buildings – DPP: The Kaka waterfront site is under thejurisdiction of the State of Hawaii, HCDA. The HCDA is charged with planning for and managing this land.Missing Crosswalk – Department of Transportation Services (DTS): The crosswalk at Kaheka and KonaStreets is privately-owned and under the jurisdiction of the Ala Moana Center, which is managed byBrookfield Properties Retail Group (BPRG), formerly General Growth Properties. Mr. Andrew Brent, Headof Communications, of BPRG may be reached by email at: [email protected] on Fire Engines – Deputy Director Santee added that he will follow up with the HFD Administrationon Cloutier's concern after Neighborhood Assistant Ho writes it up.

Comments followed:1.

after the pick-up date. So, the delay invites others to illegally dump on their bulky items. Deputy Director

responded on Rycroft, Pensacola, and Kaheka Streets. Chang added on Liona Street and that the pilesblock the use of the sidewalks, so residents walk on the road. Deputy Director Santee will follow up.

2. Traffic Accidents Around Ala Moana Center – Chung saw a report on the Internet that the most dangerousarea in the U.S. is around Ala Moana Center. He asked for any statistics that verify this claim. DeputyDirector Santee will follow up.

3. Closed Sidewalk – Resident Brian Bagnall complained that the sidewalk in front of the tower where the

a year and asked how long the contractor can inconvenience the public use of the sidewalk. Deputy DirectorSantee will follow up with the proper City agency.

Councilmember Carol Fukunaga – Councilmember Fukunaga distributed her Neighbor to Neighbor newsletter andhighlighted the following:

Transportation (HDOT) has installed "pedestrian crossing signaling" devices on Pali Highway.

neighborhoods to adopt these safety measures.Bill 75 – To address the crowded sidewalks, Department of Transportation Services (DTS) is reviewingsmall mobile devices (like bicycles, scooters, skateboards, and Segways), so that Bill 75 would better

districts.Climate Action Plan Public Meeting – Councilmember Fukunaga, Councilmember Ann Kobayashi, and theOffice of Climate Change, Sustainability, and Resilience will be holding a public meeting on Monday,

Fukunaga and Councilmember Kobayashi have introduced a resolution asking the City Administration tomore aggressively pursue to adopt the 2018 Climate Change Action Summit policies.

Comments followed:1. Bill 69, Relating to Fire Sprinklers for Condominiums – Komine asked about Bill 69. Concerning the

Emergency Conditions topic, the City Council will vote for a two (2)-year extension of deadlines at theWednesday, November 14, 2018 meeting. One (1) concern was for non-mobile people, who cannot godown 25 floors of stairs. The two (2)-year extension will give planners time to work the problems out.

2. Pedestrian Safety – Chung noted a fence at Kahala Mall to prevent people from running across the street.Although Councilmember Fukunaga was not familiar with that particular safety measure, she was awarethat many complaints come from the removal of mid-block crosswalks. She supports the installation ofpedestrian-activated lights, which are used on Pali Highway and between Honolulu Hale and the StateCapitol, where there is a mid-block crosswalk and a pedestrian-activated traffic signal and hundreds ofpeople use it daily.

Councilmember Ann Kobayashi – Councilmember Kobayashi's distributed her District V newsletter and reportedthe following:

Three (3) Parks Closed for Maintenance – There were three (3) parks closed for needed repairs andmaintenance and people started blocking the sidewalks. Councilmember Kobayashi noted that after the


Old Stadium Park is fixed up, then a Master Plan will enlist the McCully-Moand Chair Tim Streitz to help.Vision Zero Program – With so many pedestrian accidents, people are looking at Vision Zero, a programthat started in Sweden in 1990 and is moving across the United States, in New York, Chicago, Los Angeles,San Francisco, and Seattle. Pedestrian fatalities have been cut in half. The premise is that every accidentis preventable. So, they work on solutions to prevent accidents. The program is successful and a resolutionshould be passed on Wednesday, November 14, 2018 to implement this program and they will urge everyNeighborhood Board to participate to make the neighborhoods safe.Honolulu – An Age-Friendly City – The City Council also passed a bill to make Honolulu age-friendly, not

Organization (WHO) program and Councilmember Kobayashi wants to get the Ala Moana/KakaNeighborhood Board No. 11 involved, too.

Comments followed:1. Common Issues – Mariano commended Councilmember Kobayashi and Councilmember Fukunaga for

working on community issues. He visits other Neighborhood Board meetings and agrees that they shouldmeet on common areas of interest, like maintenance of the sidewalks and pedestrian safety.

2. Enforcement – Mariano added when Councilmembers are drafting legislation, they should involve HPDsooner, so they can train the officers for enforcement. Mariano added that he saw many pedestrianscrossing the street and looking at electronic devices, while bicyclists zoomed by. Everyone agreed thatHPD is under-staffed to enforce the many laws. Councilmember Kobayashi noted that hiring Park Rangersmay ease some workload. Chang noted the statistics of 6,000+ calls per month. Sometimes, it is impossibleto respond to calls. Everyone commended HPD for doing the best job with available resources.

Councilmember Trevor Ozawa – Kenny Amazaki distributed Councilmember Ozawa's Community Report andreported the following:

Monster Houses – There were many pieces of legislation, like Bill 64, concerning Department of Planningand Permitting (DPP), fines, demolishing a structure on Date Street, which was later found permitted, andan audit of DPP.Public Input – There would be many opportunities for community input.

Constitutional Amendment (ConAm) for Property Tax Surcharge (Senate Bill 2922, SD1 HD1) – Chair Tamannounced that there was no person to talk about the ConAm.

State Representative Tom Brower – Representative Tom Brower made his Neighborhood Board Report availableand highlighted the following:

ConAm Update – The HawaiOther Concerns – Other articles include muffler noise, commercial activity at Kolowalu Park, and promotingAffordable Housing.Air Horns – Representative Brower will follow up on Cloutier's complaint. He had a bill on "Bells andWhistles" and HPD and ambulance drivers may have discretionary use, but HFD does not have that choice.Cloutier agrees with the sirens and lights, but she feels the air horns are too much. Chair Tam mentionedthat construction vehicles have different types of back-up alarms. Representative Brower will shareinformation.

House Speaker Scott Saiki – James Stone distributed a Neighborhood Report and was available to hear concerns.Chair Tam asked about Private Streets. Stone responded that there is on-going litigation by the Hawaii Community

getting the private roads up to County standards. HCDA will pursue other options.

State Senator Brickwood Galuteria – There was no representative present and no report available.

Governor David Ige’s Representative – Cindy McMillian, Director of Communications, reported from the CapitolConnection for October 2018 as follows:

Capitol Connection – People are encouraged to sign up for electronic delivery of the Capitol Connectionnewsletter, if they have not already at – http://governor.hawaii.gov/subscribe.


Global Climate Action Summit – On Page 2, Governor Ige joined other environmental leaders at the GlobalClimate Action Summit in San Francisco last month to work toward the goals of the Paris Climate Accord.New Modern Payroll System – On Page 4, it has taken a dedicated team of State employees, the HawaiiPay Team, to transform the State's massive payroll system from a hugely labor-intensive process to a newcomputer-based, "best practice" operation.Pedestrian Accidents – Although the increase in crashes and fatalities is alarming, the various statistics inother States are at a particular intersection, while the statistics for Ala Moana Boulevard include the Ala

Boulevard and at Ala Moana Boulevard and Atkinson Drive. State Statistics compare "apples to apples,"so this stretch of road may not be the most dangerous road in the U.S.

Comments followed: Social Media – Chung added that drivers are texting and tweeting about road rage on Twitterand asked what the Governor's response was to this dangerous situation. McMillian also noticed drivers texting andwill follow up.

AGENCY REPORTS

Hawaii Community Development Authority (HCDA) – There was no representative present and no report wasavailable.

Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation (HART) – Pat Lee reported the following:Social Media – Lee commented that while riding the rail, Chung could e-mail or tweet whatever he wanted.Komine responded that by the time the rail is finished, Tweeter may become something else.Public/Private/Partnership Contract – The HART Board unanimously approved bringing on a private partner(called a P3, public/private/partnership contract) to help with constructing and financing the remainder ofthe rail project. This would include 4.2 miles of elevated guideway and eight stations through the center oftown between Middle Street and Ala Moana Center, called the City Center Guideway and Stations (CCGS),as well as construction of the park and ride parking garage at the Waiawa station at Pearl Highlands. Thiscontract would also include provisions to maintain and operate the system for a 30-year term. The CCGScontract would start in 2020.The City Charter – Like the Mayor, the Council and all City departments, including the NeighborhoodCommission, HART’s authority is governed by the City Charter.Act 01 – Last year, the State Legislature passed Act 01, during a Special Session, which granted additionalfunding for the rail project. It also added State oversight to the management of HART by adding four (4)State-appointed members to the HART Board, increasing its membership. These new Board members areappointed by the Senate President and House Speaker. The amendment is basically a “house-keeping”measure to bring the Charter in compliance with State law.Ballot Question – The ballot question reads: "Shall the Revised Charter of the City and County of Honolulu1973 (2017 Edition), relating to the Board of the Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation (the “Board”)be amended:o To increase the number of Board members from ten to a maximum of fifteen;o To provide that the President of the Hawaii State Senate and the Speaker of the Hawaii State House

of Representatives may each appoint up to two (2) non-voting members, for terms to be determined bythe appointing authority;

o To provide that the City Council may appoint one (1) additional voting member;o To specify that six (6) members shall constitute a quorum; ando To specify that the affirmative vote of a majority of all voting members of the Board shall be necessary

to take any action, and such action shall be made at a meeting open to the public."The amendment, if passed, would make the Charter language consistent with the changes to the HARTBoard brought on by State law, Act 01 (2017) which increases State oversight of HART by adding State-appointed Board members, with adjustments made to quorum and voting requirements, with 10 votingmembers and six (6) voting members as a majority. The Charter amendment question will appear on thisyear’s General Election ballot.No Holiday Construction – As part of the Annual Holiday Travel Work Restriction period, in collaborationwith the State Department of Transportation and the City Department of Transportation Services, there willbe no planned rail construction work-related lane closures during the Holidays. Details are available on theproject website.


Information – For more information on the rail project, please visit our website at – www.honolulutransit.org,you can call the project hotline at 566-2299, or email a question to – infohonolulutransit.org.

Comments followed:1. Public/Private/Partnership Contract – Lee clarified the 3P contract, which go through the State/City

procurement process and provide private financing.2. More to Do – Nan, Inc. has been contracted to move the utilities and get the noise variances. There are

also restrictions on the type of equipment to use. The following flyer was distributed –Halekauwila Street Lane ClosuresKeawe Street to Coral StreetLate October 2018 to Mid-January 2019The Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation (HART) would like to notify area residents and businessesof alternating lane closures associated with work to upgrade the Honolulu Rail Transit Project's utilityinfrastructure in the area. For the safety of work crews and the traveling public, please observe constructionsignage.What to Expect During Construction

Those who are in close proximity to the work zone, may experience increased noise levels, vibrationand dust from machinery during construction activity. We apologize for the inconvenience.Business and resident access will be maintained. Local Traffic will be maintained during block closure.There will be no lane closures on the following holidays:o Tuesday, November 6, 2018 in observance of General Election Day.o Monday, November 12, 2018 in observance of Veterans Day.o Thursday, November 22, 2018 to Sunday, November 25, 2018 in observance of the Thanksgiving

Weekend.o Saturday, December 22, 2018 to Friday, December 28, 2018 in observance of the Holiday Season.Bus stops and routes may be modified or closed during this operation. For up-to-date bus information,call (808) 848-5555 or visit – www.TheBus.org.Daytime Closures – There will be closures from Monday to Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.

After they are finished, the 3P contract will proceed and will be less problems and less expensive thanencountered on the west side.

3. Traffic and Noise – Mariano asked about road widening, noise variances, and night work. Lee explainedthe hours for set-up and take down before the morning rush hour traffic.

Honolulu Board of Water Supply (BWS) – There was no report, but Chair Tam read the following: Primary UrbanCenter Watershed Management Plan Community Meeting #3 – Thursday, October 25, 2018 at the Ala WaiElementary School (503 Kamoku Street) from 7:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.

PRESENTATIONS

Constitutional Amendment for Property Tax Surcharge (Senate Bill 2922, SD1 HD1) – There was no representative

Alder Street Affordable Rental Housing and Juvenile Services Center Update – Steve Teves showed renderings of

side on the Alder Street (East) side with probationary services, Judiciary shelter, and the Judiciary Receiving Center.The residential component has the residential high-rise with residential parking, while the Alder Street-side has theJudiciary entrance and parking on the ground floor. A map showed the gas station and Chinese restaurant on theKing Street side. The first floor will be for the Judiciary with part going for the lobby of the residential side. Thesecond floor will be the Judiciary offices and residential parking and the third floor and up will be for the residential,up to the 20th floor. A typical floor plan showed the layout for 200 rental units and one (1) Manager's Unit with mostat 60% Area Median Income (AMI) and five percent (5%) of the units at 30% Area Median Income (AMI). Therewere various view from other buildings, the "building envelope," the two (2) entrances, and the open space for theyouth with some secured privacy.

Comments followed:1. Two (2) Separate Projects – Oppie asked about the two (2) separate components (State and private) on

the same property. Project Manager Elton Lum from the Kobayashi group, which is the developer,


mentioned that the Kobayashi Group has a 75-year ground lease and the affordable housing will go for 72years minus the construction period. The Kobayashi Group will oversee the residential side, under theCondominium Property Regimes (CPR) and also the Judiciary side. There will be various companies todesign, build, and manage the property. Mariano was concerned about jurisdictional disputes. The Judiciarywill abide by the various filed-documents by the Kobayashi Group.

2. Other Concerns – Chung noted that neighbors had serious concerns about McKinley High School studentsmixing with the Judiciary probation youth at the bus stop. Chair Tam again mentioned having retail on theground floor. Komine added that the homeless issue may be addressed on the Judiciary-side.

3. Next Steps – Chair Tam asked about the next steps. Lum stated that they will be applying for the variouspermits and the financials with the Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corporation (HHFDC), withdemolition by the end of 2019, and construction by the start of 2020 and finish by July 2021. Chair Tamasked about additional public input. Lum noted the public concerns period was during the EnvironmentalAssessment (EA) process, but Keith Kurahashi, R.M. Towill Corporation, added there will be publichearings before the City Council, when the project is presented for final approval.

Moana Transit-Oriented Development Plan Amendment – Keith Kurahashi for Cuzco Development U.S.A presented

Street. A Fact Sheet was available. The Applicant, Cuzco Development U.S.A., LLC ("Cuzco"), proposes to

condominium residences, ancillary common area uses, and commercial development. The Cuzco Development

increase in height from 350 feet to 400 feet. Vernon Kinoshita of Design Partners, Inc. explained the need for 30,000sq. ft. of open space.

Presently, Cuzco has two (2) different design proposals under consideration, Proposal One will include 980 for-salecondominium residences, 114 affordable for-sale condominium residences with ancillary common area uses andabout 82,800 square feet of commercial uses (including retail, eating and drinking establishments, offices and otheruses), and 1,570 parking stalls. The proposed development will provide about 30,000 square feet of public openspace in a useable plaza and park area on the site. The Project Proposal One design is currently planned to havetwo (2) 350-foot tall high rises and a midrise, the two towers will be 37-story towers and the midrise will have 10floors.Design Proposal Two will include 964 for-sale condominium residences, 128 affordable for-sale condominiumresidences with ancillary common area uses and about 90,500 square feet of commercial uses (including retail,eating and drinking establishments, offices and other uses), and 1,571 parking stalls. The proposed developmentwill provide about 37,000 square feet of public open space in a useable plaza and park area on the site. SchemeTwo project design is planned to have two (2) 400-foot tall towers that will be two (2) 42-story towers.

Proposal 1 would have 1300 sq. ft. units, 400 sq. ft. studios, and 114 affordable units, with green space on the mid-rise middle section. If the project gets the 400-foot height limit, the mid-rise section would disappear and the openspace would increase to 37,000 sq. ft. Chung was concerned about parking. Kurahashi added that when the Railgoes in, there would be less of a need for parking. They are already planning for the ultimate reduction for parking.Now, they are close to the required number of spaces for parking. Comments followed: Department of Planningand Permitting (DPP) wants less parking spaces. Mariano was concerned about sewer capacity. Cloutier mentionedincreased people and noise. Another resident of the Sandalwood commented on traffic. Renee Espiau noted thatDepartment of Planning and Permitting (DPP) wanted the Ala Moana Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) more

less parking, more open spaces, and more walking. Chung suggested having no parking stalls, except for disabledpeople.

In summary, Cuzco Development U.S.A., LLC ("Cuzco"), would request that the City Council support the

project a 7.0 FAR and 400-foot height limit, an increase from the existing 5.0 FAR and 350-foot height limit in theexisting Ala Moana TOD Plan, subject to providing the open space bonus (20% of the lot).

Chair Tam noted that more public input and discussion would be allowed later on the agenda.


RESIDENTS' AND COMMUNITY CONCERNS

Kolowalu Park Events/Pet Walk – Chair Tam received concerns about the Pet Walk, which he will forward to theHawaii Community Development Authority (HCDA).

condominiums are required to put funds in local banks, but they can get higher interest rates on the mainland. Shehas a petition and would like to introduce legislation next January 2019 to change this requirement. Chair Tamwould put this item on the next agenda for discussion.

Saturday" on Saturday, November 24, 2018 from 5:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. on Auahi Street and Keawe Street. Therewill be food vendors, food trucks, and a fashion show. There were flyers in the back.

Crosswalk at Kona and Kaheka Streets – This item was forwarded to Mayor Kirk Caldwell's Representative.

BOARD MEMBER REPORTS

Attendance at Other Meetings

Oahu Metropolitan Planning Organization (OahuMPO) CAC (Citizen Advisory Committee) – Ammons mentionedthat they talked about transportation and sea level rise and global warming in Florida. There is a website to markproblem crosswalks.

Board areas and discussing modes of transportation on the sidewalks.

Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation (HART) Meeting – Mariano also attended the HART meeting last night,Monday, October 22, 2019. Chair Tam also attended.

ConCon – Oppie the University of Hawaii (UH) ConCon Survey meeting. The results were in the Sunday, October21, 2018 newspaper.

said that he and the Board support the Ala Wai Promenade project and wants to work on connectivity across

thanked Chair Streitz for his support and looked forward to future collaboration on other projects.

Community Action Committee Report – Brian Bagnall liked the beautification of the Promenade. It needs more newlighting, more divided benches, picnic tables, and a pedestrian crosswalk now. Bagnall congratulated Chair Tamfor the collaboration.

Chair’s Report – Chair Tam added that on a recent walk with Chair Streitz, they met the Blue Zones walk peopleand Chair Tam discovered a new Neighborhood Security Watch (NSW) at the Atkinson Towers at 6:00 p.m. onTuesdays.

NEW BUSINESS

Discuss Candidates Forum – Chair Tam said that this item was discussed last month. As it may be too late for thisyear's General Election, the Board could start thinking about a Candidates Forum in one and one-half (1 1/2) years.

Consider resolution regarding Ala Moana Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Plan Amendments – Chair Tamdecided to take the resolutions out of order. Kurahashi explained that they plan to present the amendment to theCity Council by November 2018 to get the 400-foot height increase. Chung was still concerned about his no parkingsuggestion. Kurahashi added that his son lives in Chicago and he does not own a car, as the transportation system


stalls. Kurahashi suggested that he needed the 400-foot amendment. Chair Tam disclosed that he would abstainfrom the vote.

support the Ala Moana Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Plan amendments. Discussion followed. Insteadof using a double negative, Ammons moved and Chung seconded to amend the resolution to read that theAla Moana/Kaka -Oriented Development(TOD) Plan amendments. The amended motion was ADOPTED, 7-0-1 (AYE: Ammons, Chang, Chung, Cloutier,Mariano, and Oppie; NAY: None; ABSTAIN: Ryan Tam).

The amended motion that theTransit-Oriented Development (TOD) Plan amendments was NOT ADOPTED, 3-4-1 (AYE: Ammons, Chung,and Komine; NAY: Chang, Cloutier, Mariano, and Oppie; ABSTAIN: Tam). No action was taken.

been filed yet, this item would be placed on the next agenda.

BOARD BUSINESS

Approval of the Tuesday, September 25, 2018 Regular Meeting Minutes – As there were no corrections orobjections, the Ala Moana/Kakaregular meeting minutes by UNANIMOUS CONSENT, 8-0-0 (AYE: Ammons, Chang, Chung, Cloutier, Komine,Mariano, Oppie, and Tam; NAY: None; ABSTAIN: None).

Treasurer’s Report – There was no Treasurer's report available.

PERMITS, HEARINGS, AND APPLICATIONS

Liquor Commission Hearing (711 Kapiolani Boulevard, 6th Floor) on Thursday, November 29, 2018 at 4:00 p.m.regarding:

ABC Stores (1450 Ala Moana Boulevard) – Retail General (Package sales);Workplay LLC (814 Ilaniwai Street) – Restaurant General (Category 2 – Live music);Hamjipark (919 Keeaumoku Street, Suite A-10) – Restaurant General (Category 1 – Standard Bar)

Pre-Assessment Consultation for Kewalo Basin National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration “NOAA” Parcel

COMMUNITY NEIGHBORHOOD WATCHESMother Waldron Park (525 Cooke Street) – Mondays, 5:15 p.m.;

Keola La – Tuesdays, 5:15 p.m.;Kolowalu Park (1177 Queen Street) – 1st and 2nd Thursdays, 6:00 p.m.Atkinson Towers (419A Atkinson Drive) – Tuesdays, 6:00 p.m.

ANNOUNCEMENTS

scheduled for Tuesday, November 27, 2018 at 7:00 p.m. at the Makiki Christian Church, 829 PensacolaStreet.Upcoming Committee Meetings – The next meeting for Community Action Committee will be held onThursday, November 8, 2018 at 6:00 p.m. at the Ala Moana Regional Park, 1201 Ala Moana Boulevard,McCoy Pavilion Dining Room.

prioritize strategies for reducing O‘ahu’s greenhouse gas emissions will be held on Monday, October 29,2018 from 6:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. at the Neal S. Blaisdell Center (777 Ward Avenue), Hawai‘i Suites.Honolulu Marathon – Road closures on Sunday, December 9, 2018 along Ala Moana Boulevard (Ewa at

beginning at 12:30 a.m. until approximately 8:00 a.m.


No Loitering – Please do not loiter on Makiki Christian Church grounds after 9:00 p.m. Mahalo.

ADJOURNMENT – As there was no further business before the Board, Chair Tam adjourned the meeting at9:22 p.m.

Submitted by: K. Russell Ho, Neighborhood AssistantReviewed by: Harry Cho, Public Relations AssistantReviewed by: Lynn Mariano, SecretaryReviewed by: Ryan Tam, Chair


APPENDIX III

PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE


APPENDIX IV

FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP AND TSUNAMI EVACUATION ZONE

USGS The National Map: Orthoimagery. Data refreshed October 2017.

National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000250Feet

Ü

157°

50'4

6.67

"W 21°18'3.54"N

157°50'9.21"W

21°17'30.02"N

SEE FIS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT

SPECIAL FLOODHAZARD AREAS

Without Base Flood Elevation (BFE)Zone A, V, A99

With BFE or Depth Zone AE, AO, AH, VE, AR

Regulatory Floodway

0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard, Areasof 1% annual chance flood with averagedepth less than one foot or with drainageareas of less than one square mile Zone X

Future Conditions 1% AnnualChance Flood Hazard Zone X

Area with Reduced Flood Risk due toLevee. See Notes. Zone X

Area with Flood Risk due to Levee Zone D

NO SCREEN Area of Minimal Flood Hazard Zone X

Area of Undetermined Flood Hazard Zone D

Channel, Culvert, or Storm Sewer

Levee, Dike, or Floodwall

Cross Sections with 1% Annual Chance17.5 Water Surface Elevation

Coastal Transect

Coastal Transect BaselineProfile BaselineHydrographic Feature

Base Flood Elevation Line (BFE)

Effective LOMRs

Limit of StudyJurisdiction Boundary

Digital Data Available

No Digital Data Available

Unmapped

This map complies with FEMA's standards for the use of digital flood maps if it is not void as described below. The basemap shown complies with FEMA's basemap accuracy standards

The flood hazard information is derived directly from theauthoritative NFHL web services provided by FEMA. This mapwas exported on 8/13/2018 at 8:47:26 PM and does notreflect changes or amendments subsequent to this date andtime. The NFHL and effective information may change orbecome superseded by new data over time.

This map image is void if the one or more of the following mapelements do not appear: basemap imagery, flood zone labels,legend, scale bar, map creation date, community identifiers,FIRM panel number, and FIRM effective date. Map images forunmapped and unmodernized areas cannot be used forregulatory purposes.

Legend

OTHER AREAS OFFLOOD HAZARD

OTHER AREAS

GENERALSTRUCTURES

OTHERFEATURES

MAP PANELS

8

1:6,000

B20.2

The pin displayed on the map is an approximate point selected by the user and does not represent an authoritative property location.


APPENDIX V

TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT

Traffic Impact Report

Keeaumoku Street Development

Prepared for:Nan Inc.

Prepared by:Wilson Okamoto Corporation

October 2018

1

KEEAUMOKU STREET DEVELOPMENT

Island of Oahu

Project Site

0 250 1000 Feet500

Project Site

KEEAUMOKU STREET

PROJECT SITE PLANFIGURE

2


3


4


5


6


7


“Highway Capacity Manual,” Transportation Research Board, 2010.

LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS

LEVEL-OF-SERVICE CRITERIA FOR AUTOMOBILES AT SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS

LOS A describes operations with a control delay of 10s/veh or less and a volume-to-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the volume-to-capacity ratio is low and either progression is exceptionally favorable or the cycle length is very short. If it is due to favorable progression, most vehicles arrive during the green indication and travel through the intersection without stopping.

LOS B describes operations with control delay between 10 and 20s/veh and a volume-to-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the volume-to-capacity ratio is low and either progression is highly favorable or the cycle length is short. More vehicles stop than with LOS A.

LOS C describes operations with control delay between 20 and 35s/veh and a volume-to-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when progression is favorable or the cycle length is moderate. Individual cycle failures (i.e., one or more queued vehicles are not able to depart as a result of insufficient capacity during the cycle) may begin to appear at this level. The number of vehicles stopping is significant, although many vehicles still pass through the intersection without stopping.

LOS D describes operations with control delay between 35 and 55s/veh and a volume-to-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the volume-to-capacity ratio is high and either progression is ineffective or the cycle length is long. Many vehicles stop and individual cycle failures are noticeable.

LOS E describes operations with control delay between 55 and 80s/veh and a volume-to-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the volume-to-capacity ratio is high, progression is unfavorable, and the cycle length is long. Individual cycle failures are frequent.

LOS F describes operations with control delay exceeding 80s/veh or a volume-to-capacity ratio greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the volume-to-capacity ratio is very high, progression is very poor, and the cycle length is long. Most Cycles fail to clear the queue.

A lane group can incur a delay less than 80s/veh when the volume-to-capacity ratio exceeds 1.0. This condition typically occurs when the cycle length is short, the signal progression is favorable, or both. As a result, both the delay and volume-to-capacity ratio are considered when lane group LOS is established. A ratio of 1.0 or more indicated that cycle capacity is fully utilized and represents failure from a capacity perspective (just as delay in excess of 80s/veh represents failure from a delay perspective).

“Highway Capacity Manual,” Transportation Research Board, 2010.

LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS

LEVEL-OF-SERVICE (LOS) CRITERIA FOR AUTOMOBILES AT A TWO-WAY STOP CONTROLLED (TWSC) INTERSECTIONS

LOS for a TWSC intersection is determined by the computed or measured control delay. For motor vehicles, LOS is determined for each minor-street movement (or shared movement) as well as major-street left turns by using criteria shown below. Major-street through vehicles are assumed to experience zero delay. LOS F is assigned to the movement if the volume-to-capacity ratio for the movement exceeds 1.0, regardless of the control delay.

The following lists the LOS criteria for a TWSC intersection:

LOS A describes operations with a control delay of 10s/veh or less and a volume-to-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0.

LOS B describes operations with a control delay between 10s/veh and 15s/veh and a volume-to-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0.

LOS C describes operations with a control delay between 15s/veh and 25s/veh and a volume-to-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0.

LOS D describes operations with a control delay between 25s/veh and 35s/veh and a volume-to-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0.

LOS E describes operations with a control delay between 35s/veh and 50s/veh and a volume-to-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0.

LOS F describes operations with a control exceeding 50s/veh and a volume-to-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0 or when the volume-to-capacity ratio exceeds 1.0, regardless of the measurement of the control delay.

10/11/2018

Keeaumoku Street Development Synchro 10 ReportAM Existing Page 1

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 148 1029 156 0 0 0 0 366 90 272 969 0Future Volume (veh/h) 148 1029 156 0 0 0 0 366 90 272 969 0Number 7 4 14 5 2 12 1 6 16Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.92 0.96 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1863 1900 0 1863 1863 1863 1863 0Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 159 1106 168 0 394 97 292 1042 0Adj No. of Lanes 0 5 0 0 2 1 1 2 0Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 2 0 0 2 2 2 2 0Cap, veh/h 304 2289 348 0 853 353 435 1577 0Arrive On Green 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.00 0.24 0.24 0.11 0.45 0.00Sat Flow, veh/h 827 6229 946 0 3632 1463 1774 3632 0Grp Volume(v), veh/h 350 789 294 0 394 97 292 1042 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1821 1509 1653 0 1770 1463 1774 1770 0Q Serve(g_s), s 8.1 7.1 7.3 0.0 5.1 2.9 0.8 12.4 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 8.1 7.1 7.3 0.0 5.1 2.9 0.8 12.4 0.0Prop In Lane 0.45 0.57 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 669 1664 608 0 853 353 435 1577 0V/C Ratio(X) 0.52 0.47 0.48 0.00 0.46 0.28 0.67 0.66 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 987 2453 896 0 1719 711 900 3372 0HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 13.3 13.0 13.0 0.0 17.3 16.5 20.1 11.7 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.6 0.2 0.6 0.0 0.4 0.4 1.8 0.5 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 4.1 3.0 3.4 0.0 2.5 1.2 4.1 6.0 0.0LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 13.9 13.2 13.6 0.0 17.7 16.9 22.0 12.1 0.0LnGrp LOS B B B B B C BApproach Vol, veh/h 1433 491 1334Approach Delay, s/veh 13.4 17.6 14.3Approach LOS B B B

Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.0 17.9 24.7 28.9Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.0 26.0 29.0 51.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.8 7.1 10.1 14.4Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.8 2.8 9.6 9.5

Intersection SummaryHCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 14.4HCM 2010 LOS B

10/11/2018

Synchro 10 ReportKeeaumoku Street DevelopmentM Existing Page 1

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 366 1825 150 0 0 0 0 842 249 242 972 0Future Volume (veh/h) 366 1825 150 0 0 0 0 842 249 242 972 0Number 7 4 14 5 2 12 1 6 16Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1863 1900 0 1863 1863 1863 1863 0Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 373 1862 153 0 859 254 247 992 0Adj No. of Lanes 0 5 0 0 2 1 1 2 0Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 2 0 0 2 2 2 2 0Cap, veh/h 482 2618 217 0 1071 434 291 1640 0Arrive On Green 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.00 0.30 0.30 0.10 0.46 0.00Sat Flow, veh/h 1173 6373 529 0 3632 1434 1774 3632 0Grp Volume(v), veh/h 574 1310 505 0 859 254 247 992 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1804 1509 1745 0 1770 1434 1774 1770 0Q Serve(g_s), s 21.8 19.1 19.1 0.0 17.8 11.9 5.5 16.6 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 21.8 19.1 19.1 0.0 17.8 11.9 5.5 16.6 0.0Prop In Lane 0.65 0.30 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 741 1860 717 0 1071 434 291 1640 0V/C Ratio(X) 0.77 0.70 0.70 0.00 0.80 0.59 0.85 0.60 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 772 1937 747 0 1247 505 408 2049 0HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 20.2 19.4 19.4 0.0 25.5 23.5 33.3 15.9 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 4.7 1.1 2.9 0.0 3.4 1.3 11.3 0.4 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 11.8 8.1 9.7 0.0 9.1 4.9 6.2 8.1 0.0LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 25.0 20.5 22.3 0.0 28.9 24.8 44.5 16.3 0.0LnGrp LOS C C C C C D BApproach Vol, veh/h 2388 1113 1239Approach Delay, s/veh 22.0 28.0 21.9Approach LOS C C C


Intersection SummaryHCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 23.4HCM 2010 LOS C

10/11/2018


IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 1.3

Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBTLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 0 73 370 22 64 990Future Vol, veh/h 0 73 370 22 64 990Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 5 0 13 13 0Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length - 0 - - - -Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0Peak Hour Factor 96 96 96 96 96 96Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2Mvmt Flow 0 76 385 23 67 1031

Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2Conflicting Flow All - 222 0 0 421 0 Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - -Critical Hdwy - 6.1 - - 4.3 -Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - -Follow-up Hdwy - 3.92 - - 3.12 -Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 710 - - 833 - Stage 1 0 - - - - - Stage 2 0 - - - - -Platoon blocked, % - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 698 - - 823 -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - -

Approach WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 10.8 0 1.1HCM LOS B

Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBTCapacity (veh/h) - - 698 823 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.109 0.081 -HCM Control Delay (s) - - 10.8 9.8 0.5HCM Lane LOS - - B A AHCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.4 0.3 -

10/11/2018

Synchro 10 ReportKeeaumoku Street DevelopmentPage 2

IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 2



Approach WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 16.6 0 2.6HCM LOS C

Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBTCapacity (veh/h) - - 410 443 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.244 0.177 -HCM Control Delay (s) - - 16.6 14.9 1.6HCM Lane LOS - - C B AHCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.9 0.6 -

10/11/2018



Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 34 43 16 48 32 20Future Vol, veh/h 34 43 16 48 32 20Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 27 12 0 8 45Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop StopRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length - - - - 0 -Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -Peak Hour Factor 84 84 84 84 84 84Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2Mvmt Flow 40 51 19 57 38 24

Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1Conflicting Flow All 0 0 118 0 196 138 Stage 1 - - - - 93 - Stage 2 - - - - 103 -Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 5.4 5.2Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1470 - 838 947 Stage 1 - - - - 931 - Stage 2 - - - - 921 -Platoon blocked, % - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1432 - 799 883Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 799 - Stage 1 - - - - 894 - Stage 2 - - - - 914 -

Approach EB WB NBHCM Control Delay, s 0 1.9 9.7HCM LOS A

Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBTCapacity (veh/h) 829 - - 1432 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.075 - - 0.013 -HCM Control Delay (s) 9.7 - - 7.5 0HCM Lane LOS A - - A AHCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0 -

10/11/2018







10/11/2018


Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 89 81 58 15 111 51 28 300 18 41 762 243Future Volume (veh/h) 89 81 58 15 111 51 28 300 18 41 762 243Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.97 0.95 0.97 0.95 0.97 0.84 0.90 0.84Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1863 1863 1900 1900 1863 1900 1900 1863 1900 1900 1863 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 90 82 59 15 112 52 28 303 18 41 770 245Adj No. of Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 0 3 0Peak Hour Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2Cap, veh/h 554 268 193 118 314 135 201 1917 113 143 1612 494Arrive On Green 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47Sat Flow, veh/h 1180 987 710 60 1156 498 181 4107 242 84 3454 1058Grp Volume(v), veh/h 90 0 141 179 0 0 119 111 119 411 350 295Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1180 0 1698 1714 0 0 1390 1543 1598 1782 1543 1272Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 2.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 1.6 0.0 6.0 6.1Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.5 0.0 2.5 3.2 0.0 0.0 6.2 1.6 1.6 5.8 6.0 6.1Prop In Lane 1.00 0.42 0.08 0.29 0.23 0.15 0.10 0.83Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 554 0 461 568 0 0 765 720 746 935 720 594V/C Ratio(X) 0.16 0.00 0.31 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.15 0.16 0.44 0.49 0.50Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1129 0 1289 1383 0 0 1787 2059 2134 2412 2059 1698HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 10.7 0.0 11.1 11.3 0.0 0.0 5.8 5.9 5.9 7.0 7.0 7.1Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 0.4 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.6Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.7 0.0 1.2 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.7 0.7 2.9 2.6 2.2LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 10.8 0.0 11.4 11.6 0.0 0.0 5.9 6.0 6.0 7.3 7.5 7.7LnGrp LOS B B B A A A A A AApproach Vol, veh/h 231 179 349 1056Approach Delay, s/veh 11.2 11.6 5.9 7.5Approach LOS B B A A


Intersection SummaryHCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 8.1HCM 2010 LOS A

10/11/2018


Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 241 136 121 28 106 82 37 695 30 37 797 199Future Volume (veh/h) 241 136 121 28 106 82 37 695 30 37 797 199Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.96 0.94 0.96 0.94 0.95 0.69 0.91 0.69Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1863 1863 1900 1900 1863 1900 1900 1863 1900 1900 1863 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 248 140 125 29 109 85 38 716 31 38 822 205Adj No. of Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 0 3 0Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2Cap, veh/h 587 302 270 126 313 214 133 1912 81 119 1497 359Arrive On Green 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43Sat Flow, veh/h 1135 878 784 100 908 621 96 4435 187 73 3472 831Grp Volume(v), veh/h 248 0 265 223 0 0 274 251 259 421 371 273Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1135 0 1663 1630 0 0 1613 1543 1563 1726 1543 1107Q Serve(g_s), s 2.0 0.0 5.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.9 5.0 0.0 8.0 8.3Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.4 0.0 5.5 4.4 0.0 0.0 4.4 4.9 5.0 7.4 8.0 8.3Prop In Lane 1.00 0.47 0.13 0.38 0.14 0.12 0.09 0.75Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 587 0 572 652 0 0 787 665 674 832 665 477V/C Ratio(X) 0.42 0.00 0.46 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.35 0.38 0.38 0.51 0.56 0.57Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1216 0 1494 1518 0 0 1428 1386 1404 1576 1386 995HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 11.5 0.0 11.4 11.0 0.0 0.0 8.4 8.6 8.6 9.3 9.5 9.6Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.5 0.0 0.6 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.7 1.1Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.5 0.0 2.6 2.1 0.0 0.0 2.3 2.2 2.2 3.9 3.5 2.6LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 12.0 0.0 12.0 11.3 0.0 0.0 8.7 9.0 9.0 9.8 10.2 10.6LnGrp LOS B B B A A A A B BApproach Vol, veh/h 513 223 785 1065Approach Delay, s/veh 12.0 11.3 8.9 10.2Approach LOS B B A B



10/11/2018


Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 2 27 25 75 40 117 67 242 20 74 675 71Future Volume (veh/h) 2 27 25 75 40 117 67 242 20 74 675 71Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.96 0.94 0.94 0.94 1.00 0.86 1.00 0.87Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1863 1863 1900 1863 1863 1863 1863 1900 1863 1863 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 2 28 26 79 42 123 71 255 21 78 711 75Adj No. of Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 3 0 1 3 0Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2Cap, veh/h 89 473 386 348 160 386 114 1668 133 121 1636 170Arrive On Green 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.06 0.35 0.35 0.07 0.36 0.36Sat Flow, veh/h 27 1819 1485 850 614 1485 1774 4740 377 1774 4603 479Grp Volume(v), veh/h 30 0 26 121 0 123 71 180 96 78 521 265Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1846 0 1485 1465 0 1485 1774 1695 1727 1774 1695 1691Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 0.6 1.8 0.0 3.1 1.8 1.7 1.8 2.0 5.5 5.6Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.6 0.0 0.6 2.9 0.0 3.1 1.8 1.7 1.8 2.0 5.5 5.6Prop In Lane 0.07 1.00 0.65 1.00 1.00 0.22 1.00 0.28Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 562 0 386 508 0 386 114 1193 608 121 1205 601V/C Ratio(X) 0.05 0.00 0.07 0.24 0.00 0.32 0.62 0.15 0.16 0.65 0.43 0.44Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1128 0 855 959 0 855 568 2387 1216 568 2387 1191HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 13.0 0.0 13.1 13.8 0.0 14.0 21.4 10.4 10.4 21.3 11.5 11.5Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.5 5.4 0.1 0.1 5.7 0.2 0.5Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.3 0.0 0.3 1.3 0.0 1.3 1.1 0.8 0.9 1.2 2.6 2.7LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 13.1 0.0 13.1 14.1 0.0 14.5 26.8 10.5 10.5 27.0 11.7 12.1LnGrp LOS B B B B C B B C B BApproach Vol, veh/h 56 244 347 864Approach Delay, s/veh 13.1 14.3 13.8 13.2Approach LOS B B B B

Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s8.2 21.5 17.2 8.0 21.7 17.2Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s15.0 33.0 27.0 15.0 33.0 27.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s4.0 3.8 2.6 3.8 7.6 5.1Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 1.8 0.2 0.1 5.7 1.1


10/11/2018


Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 15 48 58 109 61 162 114 629 68 116 745 89Future Volume (veh/h) 15 48 58 109 61 162 114 629 68 116 745 89Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.87 0.78 0.82 0.78 1.00 0.72 1.00 0.72Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1863 1863 1900 1863 1863 1863 1863 1900 1863 1863 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 15 49 60 112 63 167 118 648 70 120 768 92Adj No. of Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 3 0 1 3 0Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2Cap, veh/h 157 452 397 342 170 397 155 1438 150 158 1420 166Arrive On Green 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.09 0.32 0.32 0.09 0.32 0.32Sat Flow, veh/h 242 1410 1238 736 532 1238 1774 4485 469 1774 4410 516Grp Volume(v), veh/h 64 0 60 175 0 167 118 485 233 120 586 274Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1651 0 1238 1268 0 1238 1774 1695 1564 1774 1695 1536Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 1.9 4.4 0.0 5.9 3.6 6.3 6.6 3.7 7.9 8.2Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.3 0.0 1.9 5.8 0.0 5.9 3.6 6.3 6.6 3.7 7.9 8.2Prop In Lane 0.23 1.00 0.64 1.00 1.00 0.30 1.00 0.34Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 609 0 397 513 0 397 155 1087 501 158 1092 495V/C Ratio(X) 0.11 0.00 0.15 0.34 0.00 0.42 0.76 0.45 0.47 0.76 0.54 0.55Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 949 0 669 786 0 669 511 1771 817 511 1771 802HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 13.3 0.0 13.5 14.7 0.0 14.8 24.8 15.0 15.1 24.7 15.4 15.5Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.0 0.7 7.4 0.3 0.7 7.3 0.4 1.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.7 0.0 0.7 2.1 0.0 2.1 2.1 2.9 2.9 2.1 3.7 3.6LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 13.4 0.0 13.7 15.1 0.0 15.5 32.2 15.2 15.7 32.0 15.8 16.5LnGrp LOS B B B B C B B C B BApproach Vol, veh/h 124 342 836 980Approach Delay, s/veh 13.5 15.3 17.8 18.0Approach LOS B B B B



10/11/2018


Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 29 66 53 165 110 57 68 88 66 42 137 15Future Volume (veh/h) 29 66 53 165 110 57 68 88 66 42 137 15Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.96 0.93 0.95 0.93 0.93 0.91 0.94 0.91Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1863 1900 1863 1863 1900 1900 1863 1900 1900 1863 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 31 70 56 176 117 61 72 94 70 45 146 16Adj No. of Lanes 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2Cap, veh/h 182 271 177 626 345 180 248 270 157 209 528 50Arrive On Green 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38Sat Flow, veh/h 158 882 576 1199 1125 586 267 706 410 191 1380 132Grp Volume(v), veh/h 157 0 0 176 0 178 236 0 0 207 0 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1616 0 0 1199 0 1711 1384 0 0 1702 0 0Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 2.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.3 0.0 0.0 2.8 0.0 2.6 3.6 0.0 0.0 2.6 0.0 0.0Prop In Lane 0.20 0.36 1.00 0.34 0.31 0.30 0.22 0.08Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 630 0 0 626 0 525 675 0 0 787 0 0V/C Ratio(X) 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.34 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.00 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1302 0 0 1151 0 1275 1230 0 0 1469 0 0HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 8.5 0.0 0.0 8.6 0.0 8.6 7.2 0.0 0.0 6.9 0.0 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.4 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln1.1 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 1.2 1.6 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 8.7 0.0 0.0 8.9 0.0 9.0 7.6 0.0 0.0 7.1 0.0 0.0LnGrp LOS A A A A AApproach Vol, veh/h 157 354 236 207Approach Delay, s/veh 8.7 8.9 7.6 7.1Approach LOS A A A A



10/11/2018


Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 20 127 53 129 150 53 127 156 219 70 142 44Future Volume (veh/h) 20 127 53 129 150 53 127 156 219 70 142 44Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.94 0.90 0.94 0.90 0.92 0.88 0.97 0.88Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1863 1900 1863 1863 1900 1900 1863 1900 1900 1863 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 21 131 55 133 155 55 131 161 226 72 146 45Adj No. of Lanes 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2Cap, veh/h 115 345 133 542 381 135 222 229 268 242 447 120Arrive On Green 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47Sat Flow, veh/h 75 1155 445 1118 1274 452 250 489 572 288 954 257Grp Volume(v), veh/h 207 0 0 133 0 210 518 0 0 263 0 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1675 0 0 1118 0 1726 1310 0 0 1499 0 0Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.2 10.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.1 0.0 0.0 2.8 0.0 4.2 14.6 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0Prop In Lane 0.10 0.27 1.00 0.26 0.25 0.44 0.27 0.17Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 593 0 0 542 0 516 718 0 0 809 0 0V/C Ratio(X) 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.41 0.72 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 787 0 0 676 0 723 1069 0 0 1201 0 0HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 12.0 0.0 0.0 11.6 0.0 12.0 9.8 0.0 0.0 7.1 0.0 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.5 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln2.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 2.1 5.5 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 12.4 0.0 0.0 11.8 0.0 12.5 11.1 0.0 0.0 7.4 0.0 0.0LnGrp LOS B B B B AApproach Vol, veh/h 207 343 518 263Approach Delay, s/veh 12.4 12.2 11.1 7.4Approach LOS B B B A



10/11/2018



Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 20 66 135 23 7 17Future Vol, veh/h 20 66 135 23 7 17Conflicting Peds, #/hr 22 0 0 22 70 0Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop StopRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length - - - - 0 -Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 -Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 -Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2Mvmt Flow 24 80 165 28 9 21

Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2Conflicting Flow All 215 0 - 0 399 201 Stage 1 - - - - 201 - Stage 2 - - - - 198 -Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 5.4 5.2Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1355 - - - 679 889 Stage 1 - - - - 833 - Stage 2 - - - - 835 -Platoon blocked, % - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1327 - - - 638 870Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 638 - Stage 1 - - - - 800 - Stage 2 - - - - 817 -

Approach EB WB SBHCM Control Delay, s 1.8 0 9.8HCM LOS A

Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1Capacity (veh/h) 1327 - - - 787HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.018 - - - 0.037HCM Control Delay (s) 7.8 0 - - 9.8HCM Lane LOS A A - - AHCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - - 0.1

10/11/2018





Approach EB WB SBHCM Control Delay, s 1.3 0 10.3HCM LOS B

Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1Capacity (veh/h) 1301 - - - 742HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.026 - - - 0.079HCM Control Delay (s) 7.8 0 - - 10.3HCM Lane LOS A A - - BHCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - - 0.3

10/11/2018



Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 20 0 72 0 0 0 146 195 1 0 170 24Future Vol, veh/h 20 0 72 0 0 0 146 195 1 0 170 24Conflicting Peds, #/hr 16 0 16 16 0 16 3 0 27 27 0 3Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - NoneStorage Length - - - - - - - - - - - -Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2Mvmt Flow 22 0 77 0 0 0 157 210 1 0 183 26

Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2Conflicting Flow All 740 751 215 803 764 254 212 0 0 238 0 0 Stage 1 199 199 - 552 552 - - - - - - - Stage 2 541 552 - 251 212 - - - - - - -Critical Hdwy 6.1 5.5 5.2 6.1 5.5 5.2 4.12 - - 4.12 - -Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - -Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 410 420 877 379 414 843 1358 - - 1329 - - Stage 1 803 736 - 518 515 - - - - - - - Stage 2 525 515 - 753 727 - - - - - - -Platoon blocked, % - - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 362 354 861 298 349 809 1354 - - 1295 - -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 362 354 - 298 349 - - - - - - - Stage 1 696 734 - 439 436 - - - - - - - Stage 2 449 436 - 675 725 - - - - - - -

Approach EB WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 11.4 0 3.4 0HCM LOS B A

Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBRCapacity (veh/h) 1354 - - 662 - 1295 - -HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.116 - - 0.149 - - - -HCM Control Delay (s) 8 0 - 11.4 0 0 - -HCM Lane LOS A A - B A A - -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.4 - - 0.5 - 0 - -

10/11/2018





Approach EB WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 18.2 14.3 3 0HCM LOS C B

Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBRCapacity (veh/h) 1250 - - 460 391 1153 - -HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.178 - - 0.41 0.008 0.001 - -HCM Control Delay (s) 8.5 0 - 18.2 14.3 8.1 0 -HCM Lane LOS A A - C B A A -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.6 - - 2 0 0 - -

10/11/2018

Keeaumoku Street Development Synchro 10 ReportAM Year 2024 (Without Project) Page 1




10/11/2018

Synchro 10 ReportKeeaumoku Street DevelopmentM Year 2024 (Without Project) Page 1

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 389 1937 159 0 0 0 0 1030 264 257 1177 0Future Volume (veh/h) 389 1937 159 0 0 0 0 1030 264 257 1177 0Number 7 4 14 5 2 12 1 6 16Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.90 0.99 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1863 1900 0 1863 1863 1863 1863 0Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 397 1977 162 0 1051 269 262 1201 0Adj No. of Lanes 0 5 0 0 2 1 1 2 0Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 2 0 0 2 2 2 2 0Cap, veh/h 445 2409 199 0 1182 475 300 1788 0Arrive On Green 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.33 0.33 0.11 0.51 0.00Sat Flow, veh/h 1173 6355 526 0 3632 1423 1774 3632 0Grp Volume(v), veh/h 611 1394 531 0 1051 269 262 1201 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1804 1509 1723 0 1770 1423 1774 1770 0Q Serve(g_s), s 27.5 23.9 23.9 0.0 24.3 13.4 7.6 22.0 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 27.5 23.9 23.9 0.0 24.3 13.4 7.6 22.0 0.0Prop In Lane 0.65 0.31 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 684 1716 653 0 1182 475 300 1788 0V/C Ratio(X) 0.89 0.81 0.81 0.00 0.89 0.57 0.87 0.67 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 689 1728 657 0 1228 494 345 1924 0HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 25.2 24.1 24.1 0.0 27.3 23.6 35.9 16.0 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 14.0 3.1 7.6 0.0 8.1 1.4 19.3 0.8 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 16.2 10.4 12.7 0.0 13.2 5.4 7.7 10.9 0.0LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 39.2 27.1 31.7 0.0 35.4 25.1 55.1 16.9 0.0LnGrp LOS D C C D C E BApproach Vol, veh/h 2536 1320 1463Approach Delay, s/veh 31.0 33.3 23.7Approach LOS C C C



10/11/2018






Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBTCapacity (veh/h) - - 611 688 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.124 0.103 -HCM Control Delay (s) - - 11.7 10.8 0.9HCM Lane LOS - - B B AHCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.4 0.3 -

10/11/2018

Synchro 10 ReportPage 2





Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBTCapacity (veh/h) - - 362 374 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.276 0.223 -HCM Control Delay (s) - - 18.7 17.4 3.4HCM Lane LOS - - C C AHCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 1.1 0.8 -

10/11/2018







10/11/2018







10/11/2018


Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 89 81 58 15 111 51 30 509 19 44 897 258Future Volume (veh/h) 89 81 58 15 111 51 30 509 19 44 897 258Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.97 0.95 0.97 0.95 0.98 0.86 0.94 0.86Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1863 1863 1900 1900 1863 1900 1900 1863 1900 1900 1863 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 90 82 59 15 112 52 30 514 19 44 906 261Adj No. of Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 0 3 0Peak Hour Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2Cap, veh/h 496 269 194 93 316 136 151 2310 85 123 1874 527Arrive On Green 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53Sat Flow, veh/h 1180 987 710 59 1158 498 129 4367 160 85 3542 995Grp Volume(v), veh/h 90 0 141 179 0 0 189 180 194 461 402 348Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1180 0 1698 1715 0 0 1478 1543 1636 1753 1543 1327Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.1 3.2 0.0 8.4 8.4Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.2 0.0 3.3 4.2 0.0 0.0 2.7 3.1 3.2 7.8 8.4 8.4Prop In Lane 1.00 0.42 0.08 0.29 0.16 0.10 0.10 0.75Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 496 0 463 545 0 0 865 816 865 1005 816 702V/C Ratio(X) 0.18 0.00 0.30 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.46 0.49 0.50Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 853 0 977 1051 0 0 1475 1561 1655 1806 1561 1343HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 14.1 0.0 14.5 14.9 0.0 0.0 6.2 6.3 6.3 7.4 7.6 7.6Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 0.4 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.5Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.0 0.0 1.6 2.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 1.3 1.4 4.1 3.6 3.1LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 14.3 0.0 14.9 15.2 0.0 0.0 6.3 6.5 6.5 7.8 8.0 8.1LnGrp LOS B B B A A A A A AApproach Vol, veh/h 231 179 563 1211Approach Delay, s/veh 14.7 15.2 6.4 8.0Approach LOS B B A A



10/11/2018


Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 241 136 121 28 106 82 39 874 32 39 991 211Future Volume (veh/h) 241 136 121 28 106 82 39 874 32 39 991 211Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.96 0.95 0.97 0.95 0.97 0.69 0.94 0.69Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1863 1863 1900 1900 1863 1900 1900 1863 1900 1900 1863 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 248 140 125 29 109 85 40 901 33 40 1022 218Adj No. of Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 0 3 0Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2Cap, veh/h 579 355 317 111 359 249 101 1876 67 94 1571 329Arrive On Green 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44Sat Flow, veh/h 1141 883 788 114 894 621 81 4286 154 72 3589 751Grp Volume(v), veh/h 248 0 265 223 0 0 305 329 341 494 446 340Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1141 0 1671 1628 0 0 1390 1543 1588 1697 1543 1173Q Serve(g_s), s 4.4 0.0 7.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 9.5 9.6 1.0 14.2 14.3Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 10.0 0.0 7.0 5.6 0.0 0.0 15.2 9.5 9.6 12.9 14.2 14.3Prop In Lane 1.00 0.47 0.13 0.38 0.13 0.10 0.08 0.64Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 579 0 671 719 0 0 674 675 695 805 675 513V/C Ratio(X) 0.43 0.00 0.39 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.49 0.49 0.61 0.66 0.66Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 780 0 966 996 0 0 1024 1090 1122 1228 1090 829HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 14.1 0.0 13.2 12.8 0.0 0.0 11.9 12.5 12.5 13.4 13.8 13.9Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.5 0.0 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.8 1.1 1.5Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 3.3 0.0 3.3 2.7 0.0 0.0 3.6 4.1 4.3 6.6 6.1 4.7LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 14.6 0.0 13.6 13.1 0.0 0.0 12.3 13.0 13.1 14.2 14.9 15.3LnGrp LOS B B B B B B B B BApproach Vol, veh/h 513 223 974 1280Approach Delay, s/veh 14.1 13.1 12.8 14.7Approach LOS B B B B



10/11/2018


Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 2 27 25 75 40 117 71 448 117 79 805 75Future Volume (veh/h) 2 27 25 75 40 117 71 448 117 79 805 75Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.96 0.95 0.96 0.95 1.00 0.88 1.00 0.88Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1863 1863 1900 1863 1863 1863 1863 1900 1863 1863 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 2 28 26 79 42 123 75 472 123 83 847 79Adj No. of Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 3 0 1 3 0Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2Cap, veh/h 68 615 514 395 193 514 97 1536 379 107 1846 171Arrive On Green 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.05 0.39 0.39 0.06 0.40 0.40Sat Flow, veh/h 42 1803 1508 914 567 1508 1774 3948 974 1774 4674 433Grp Volume(v), veh/h 30 0 26 121 0 123 75 402 193 83 613 313Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1845 0 1508 1482 0 1508 1774 1695 1532 1774 1695 1717Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 0.8 2.9 0.0 4.2 3.0 5.9 6.3 3.3 9.5 9.7Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.8 0.0 0.8 3.9 0.0 4.2 3.0 5.9 6.3 3.3 9.5 9.7Prop In Lane 0.07 1.00 0.65 1.00 1.00 0.64 1.00 0.25Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 683 0 514 588 0 514 97 1319 596 107 1339 678V/C Ratio(X) 0.04 0.00 0.05 0.21 0.00 0.24 0.78 0.30 0.32 0.77 0.46 0.46Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 900 0 695 764 0 695 223 1563 706 223 1563 792HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 15.8 0.0 15.8 16.8 0.0 16.9 33.4 15.1 15.3 33.1 16.0 16.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.2 12.4 0.1 0.3 11.2 0.2 0.5Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.4 0.0 0.3 1.7 0.0 1.8 1.8 2.8 2.7 1.9 4.5 4.6LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 15.8 0.0 15.9 16.9 0.0 17.2 45.8 15.3 15.6 44.4 16.2 16.5LnGrp LOS B B B B D B B D B BApproach Vol, veh/h 56 244 670 1009Approach Delay, s/veh 15.8 17.1 18.8 18.6Approach LOS B B B B



10/11/2018


Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 15 48 58 109 61 162 121 804 148 123 936 94Future Volume (veh/h) 15 48 58 109 61 162 121 804 148 123 936 94Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.85 0.82 0.83 0.82 1.00 0.73 1.00 0.73Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1863 1863 1900 1863 1863 1863 1863 1900 1863 1863 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 15 49 60 112 63 167 125 829 153 127 965 97Adj No. of Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 3 0 1 3 0Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2Cap, veh/h 172 527 497 388 202 497 159 1354 244 162 1512 151Arrive On Green 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.09 0.33 0.33 0.09 0.33 0.33Sat Flow, veh/h 299 1375 1295 813 527 1295 1774 4068 735 1774 4526 451Grp Volume(v), veh/h 64 0 60 175 0 167 125 688 294 127 721 341Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1673 0 1295 1340 0 1295 1774 1695 1413 1774 1695 1587Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 2.3 5.0 0.0 7.1 5.4 13.2 13.7 5.5 14.0 14.2Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.7 0.0 2.3 6.7 0.0 7.1 5.4 13.2 13.7 5.5 14.0 14.2Prop In Lane 0.23 1.00 0.64 1.00 1.00 0.52 1.00 0.28Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 699 0 497 590 0 497 159 1128 470 162 1132 530V/C Ratio(X) 0.09 0.00 0.12 0.30 0.00 0.34 0.78 0.61 0.63 0.78 0.64 0.64Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 743 0 532 625 0 532 296 1392 580 296 1392 652HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 15.3 0.0 15.5 16.7 0.0 17.0 34.7 21.8 21.9 34.7 21.9 22.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.4 8.2 0.5 1.4 8.1 0.7 1.5Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.9 0.0 0.8 2.7 0.0 2.6 3.0 6.2 5.5 3.0 6.6 6.4LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 15.4 0.0 15.6 17.0 0.0 17.4 42.9 22.3 23.4 42.8 22.6 23.5LnGrp LOS B B B B D C C D C CApproach Vol, veh/h 124 342 1107 1189Approach Delay, s/veh 15.5 17.2 24.9 25.0Approach LOS B B C C



10/11/2018





10/11/2018


Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 20 127 53 129 150 53 127 169 219 70 173 44Future Volume (veh/h) 20 127 53 129 150 53 127 169 219 70 173 44Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.94 0.90 0.93 0.90 0.92 0.87 0.97 0.87Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1863 1900 1863 1863 1900 1900 1863 1900 1900 1863 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 21 131 55 133 155 55 131 174 226 72 178 45Adj No. of Lanes 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2Cap, veh/h 103 428 165 577 471 167 199 219 246 192 432 97Arrive On Green 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44Sat Flow, veh/h 72 1160 446 1113 1274 452 257 500 561 241 986 221Grp Volume(v), veh/h 207 0 0 133 0 210 531 0 0 295 0 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1677 0 0 1113 0 1726 1318 0 0 1448 0 0Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.5 13.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.5 0.0 0.0 3.4 0.0 4.5 19.4 0.0 0.0 5.8 0.0 0.0Prop In Lane 0.10 0.27 1.00 0.26 0.25 0.43 0.24 0.15Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 696 0 0 577 0 638 663 0 0 720 0 0V/C Ratio(X) 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.00 0.33 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.41 0.00 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 877 0 0 701 0 831 719 0 0 784 0 0HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 11.7 0.0 0.0 11.4 0.0 11.7 13.3 0.0 0.0 9.8 0.0 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.3 6.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln2.2 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 2.2 8.0 0.0 0.0 2.9 0.0 0.0LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 12.0 0.0 0.0 11.6 0.0 12.0 19.3 0.0 0.0 10.2 0.0 0.0LnGrp LOS B B B B BApproach Vol, veh/h 207 343 531 295Approach Delay, s/veh 12.0 11.9 19.3 10.2Approach LOS B B B B



10/11/2018







10/11/2018







10/11/2018







10/11/2018





Approach EB WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 19.9 14.8 3.1 0HCM LOS C B

Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBRCapacity (veh/h) 1189 - - 427 370 1148 - -HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.187 - - 0.442 0.008 0.001 - -HCM Control Delay (s) 8.7 0 - 19.9 14.8 8.1 0 -HCM Lane LOS A A - C B A A -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.7 - - 2.2 0 0 - -

10/11/2018

Keeaumoku Street Development Synchro 10 ReportAM Year 2024 plus Project Page 1




10/11/2018

Synchro 10 ReportKeeaumoku Street Development Year 2024 plus Project Page 1

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 389 1937 194 0 0 0 0 1048 269 257 1196 0Future Volume (veh/h) 389 1937 194 0 0 0 0 1048 269 257 1196 0Number 7 4 14 5 2 12 1 6 16Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.90 0.99 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1863 1900 0 1863 1863 1863 1863 0Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 397 1977 198 0 1069 274 262 1220 0Adj No. of Lanes 0 5 0 0 2 1 1 2 0Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 2 0 0 2 2 2 2 0Cap, veh/h 425 2305 233 0 1232 498 299 1823 0Arrive On Green 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.00 0.35 0.35 0.11 0.52 0.00Sat Flow, veh/h 1152 6241 631 0 3632 1429 1774 3632 0Grp Volume(v), veh/h 622 1419 531 0 1069 274 262 1220 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1805 1509 1693 0 1770 1429 1774 1770 0Q Serve(g_s), s 28.7 24.9 24.9 0.0 24.4 13.4 7.3 22.1 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 28.7 24.9 24.9 0.0 24.4 13.4 7.3 22.1 0.0Prop In Lane 0.64 0.37 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 667 1672 625 0 1232 498 299 1823 0V/C Ratio(X) 0.93 0.85 0.85 0.00 0.87 0.55 0.88 0.67 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 668 1674 626 0 1309 529 331 1964 0HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 26.3 25.1 25.1 0.0 26.3 22.7 36.0 15.5 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 20.1 4.3 10.7 0.0 6.2 1.1 20.8 0.8 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 17.9 11.1 13.5 0.0 12.9 5.4 7.8 10.9 0.0LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 46.4 29.4 35.7 0.0 32.5 23.8 56.8 16.3 0.0LnGrp LOS D C D C C E BApproach Vol, veh/h 2572 1343 1482Approach Delay, s/veh 34.8 30.7 23.5Approach LOS C C C



10/11/2018






Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBTCapacity (veh/h) - - 592 660 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.178 0.115 -HCM Control Delay (s) - - 12.4 11.2 1.1HCM Lane LOS - - B B AHCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.6 0.4 -

10/11/2018






Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBTCapacity (veh/h) - - 354 363 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.338 0.278 -HCM Control Delay (s) - - 20.3 18.7 4.7HCM Lane LOS - - C C AHCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 1.5 1.1 -

10/11/2018







10/11/2018







10/11/2018


Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 90 82 58 45 150 100 30 501 34 65 891 258Future Volume (veh/h) 90 82 58 45 150 100 30 501 34 65 891 258Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.98 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.98 0.83 0.93 0.83Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1863 1863 1900 1900 1863 1900 1900 1863 1900 1900 1863 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 91 83 59 45 152 101 30 506 34 66 900 261Adj No. of Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 0 3 0Peak Hour Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2Cap, veh/h 525 363 258 131 348 205 129 1847 122 145 1518 429Arrive On Green 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45Sat Flow, veh/h 1100 998 710 143 956 564 110 4132 272 149 3397 961Grp Volume(v), veh/h 91 0 142 298 0 0 184 188 198 458 417 353Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1100 0 1708 1663 0 0 1389 1543 1583 1665 1543 1299Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 4.1 4.2 2.0 10.8 10.9Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.3 0.0 3.0 7.0 0.0 0.0 11.2 4.1 4.2 9.9 10.8 10.9Prop In Lane 1.00 0.42 0.15 0.34 0.16 0.17 0.14 0.74Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 525 0 621 683 0 0 700 689 708 822 689 581V/C Ratio(X) 0.17 0.00 0.23 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.27 0.28 0.56 0.60 0.61Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 834 0 1100 1135 0 0 1234 1344 1380 1486 1344 1132HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 11.7 0.0 11.7 12.9 0.0 0.0 9.0 9.2 9.2 10.7 11.1 11.1Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.6 0.9 1.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.9 0.0 1.5 3.4 0.0 0.0 1.7 1.8 1.9 5.0 4.7 4.0LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 11.9 0.0 11.8 13.3 0.0 0.0 9.2 9.4 9.4 11.3 11.9 12.1LnGrp LOS B B B A A A B B BApproach Vol, veh/h 233 298 570 1227Approach Delay, s/veh 11.9 13.3 9.3 11.7Approach LOS B B A B



10/11/2018


Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 211 143 121 38 119 114 39 874 76 95 975 211Future Volume (veh/h) 211 143 121 38 119 114 39 874 76 95 975 211Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.97 0.94 0.97 0.94 0.99 0.72 0.96 0.72Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1863 1863 1900 1900 1863 1900 1900 1863 1900 1900 1863 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 218 147 125 39 123 118 40 901 78 98 1005 218Adj No. of Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 0 3 0Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2Cap, veh/h 480 340 289 106 300 253 96 1869 158 162 1466 312Arrive On Green 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48Sat Flow, veh/h 1095 904 768 128 797 674 79 3878 328 201 3042 648Grp Volume(v), veh/h 218 0 272 280 0 0 302 363 354 369 518 433Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1095 0 1672 1600 0 0 1254 1543 1489 1061 1543 1287Q Serve(g_s), s 4.9 0.0 8.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 11.2 11.4 9.6 18.4 18.5Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 13.6 0.0 8.5 8.7 0.0 0.0 20.4 11.2 11.4 20.9 18.4 18.5Prop In Lane 1.00 0.46 0.14 0.42 0.13 0.22 0.27 0.50Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 480 0 628 660 0 0 662 743 717 576 743 620V/C Ratio(X) 0.45 0.00 0.43 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.46 0.49 0.49 0.64 0.70 0.70Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 598 0 809 826 0 0 889 1010 974 773 1010 843HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 18.3 0.0 16.4 16.4 0.0 0.0 11.7 12.3 12.4 14.2 14.2 14.2Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.7 0.0 0.5 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.2 1.3 1.6Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 3.5 0.0 4.0 4.1 0.0 0.0 3.7 4.8 4.7 5.9 8.0 6.8LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 19.0 0.0 16.8 16.9 0.0 0.0 12.2 12.8 12.9 15.4 15.5 15.8LnGrp LOS B B B B B B B B BApproach Vol, veh/h 490 280 1019 1321Approach Delay, s/veh 17.8 16.9 12.7 15.6Approach LOS B B B B



10/11/2018


Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 2 27 25 75 40 117 71 455 117 79 835 75Future Volume (veh/h) 2 27 25 75 40 117 71 455 117 79 835 75Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.96 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.88 1.00 0.88Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1863 1863 1900 1863 1863 1863 1863 1900 1863 1863 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 2 28 26 79 42 123 75 479 123 83 879 79Adj No. of Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 3 0 1 3 0Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2Cap, veh/h 72 586 487 386 187 487 102 1508 367 107 1802 161Arrive On Green 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.06 0.38 0.38 0.06 0.38 0.38Sat Flow, veh/h 37 1809 1504 905 577 1504 1774 3959 963 1774 4691 419Grp Volume(v), veh/h 30 0 26 121 0 123 75 406 196 83 634 324Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1847 0 1504 1482 0 1504 1774 1695 1531 1774 1695 1719Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 0.8 2.5 0.0 3.9 2.7 5.4 5.8 2.9 9.1 9.2Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.7 0.0 0.8 3.6 0.0 3.9 2.7 5.4 5.8 2.9 9.1 9.2Prop In Lane 0.07 1.00 0.65 1.00 1.00 0.63 1.00 0.24Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 658 0 487 573 0 487 102 1292 584 107 1302 660V/C Ratio(X) 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.21 0.00 0.25 0.73 0.31 0.34 0.77 0.49 0.49Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 950 0 729 808 0 729 305 1750 790 305 1750 887HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 14.9 0.0 14.9 15.8 0.0 15.9 29.6 13.9 14.0 29.6 14.9 14.9Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.3 9.7 0.1 0.3 11.1 0.3 0.6Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.4 0.0 0.3 1.6 0.0 1.6 1.6 2.5 2.5 1.8 4.3 4.4LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 14.9 0.0 14.9 15.9 0.0 16.2 39.4 14.1 14.4 40.7 15.2 15.5LnGrp LOS B B B B D B B D B BApproach Vol, veh/h 56 244 677 1041Approach Delay, s/veh 14.9 16.1 17.0 17.3Approach LOS B B B B



10/11/2018


Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 15 48 58 109 61 162 121 847 148 123 946 94Future Volume (veh/h) 15 48 58 109 61 162 121 847 148 123 946 94Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.85 0.81 0.83 0.81 1.00 0.73 1.00 0.73Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1863 1863 1900 1863 1863 1863 1863 1900 1863 1863 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 15 49 60 112 63 167 125 873 153 127 975 97Adj No. of Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 3 0 1 3 0Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2Cap, veh/h 169 518 485 381 198 485 160 1389 239 162 1537 152Arrive On Green 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.09 0.34 0.34 0.09 0.34 0.34Sat Flow, veh/h 296 1378 1289 810 528 1289 1774 4115 709 1774 4536 448Grp Volume(v), veh/h 64 0 60 175 0 167 125 717 309 127 727 345Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1674 0 1289 1338 0 1289 1774 1695 1434 1774 1695 1593Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 2.3 5.0 0.0 7.1 5.3 13.6 14.0 5.4 13.9 14.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.7 0.0 2.3 6.7 0.0 7.1 5.3 13.6 14.0 5.4 13.9 14.0Prop In Lane 0.23 1.00 0.64 1.00 1.00 0.49 1.00 0.28Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 687 0 485 580 0 485 160 1144 484 162 1149 540V/C Ratio(X) 0.09 0.00 0.12 0.30 0.00 0.34 0.78 0.63 0.64 0.78 0.63 0.64Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 732 0 520 616 0 520 300 1368 579 300 1368 643HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 15.5 0.0 15.7 16.9 0.0 17.2 34.2 21.4 21.5 34.2 21.4 21.4Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.4 8.1 0.7 1.8 8.0 0.7 1.6Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.9 0.0 0.8 2.7 0.0 2.6 3.0 6.5 5.7 3.0 6.6 6.4LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 15.5 0.0 15.8 17.2 0.0 17.6 42.3 22.0 23.3 42.2 22.1 23.0LnGrp LOS B B B B D C C D C CApproach Vol, veh/h 124 342 1151 1199Approach Delay, s/veh 15.7 17.4 24.6 24.5Approach LOS B B C C



10/11/2018





10/11/2018


Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 20 139 53 137 155 53 127 169 219 70 173 44Future Volume (veh/h) 20 139 53 137 155 53 127 169 219 70 173 44Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.94 0.90 0.94 0.90 0.92 0.87 0.97 0.87Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1863 1900 1863 1863 1900 1900 1863 1900 1900 1863 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 21 143 55 141 160 55 131 174 226 72 178 45Adj No. of Lanes 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2Cap, veh/h 101 442 157 569 476 164 199 219 245 191 431 97Arrive On Green 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44Sat Flow, veh/h 68 1194 423 1103 1286 442 257 500 561 240 986 221Grp Volume(v), veh/h 219 0 0 141 0 215 531 0 0 295 0 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1686 0 0 1103 0 1729 1318 0 0 1447 0 0Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.7 13.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.7 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.0 4.7 19.5 0.0 0.0 5.9 0.0 0.0Prop In Lane 0.10 0.25 1.00 0.26 0.25 0.43 0.24 0.15Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 700 0 0 569 0 640 663 0 0 719 0 0V/C Ratio(X) 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.34 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.41 0.00 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 880 0 0 691 0 831 717 0 0 781 0 0HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 11.8 0.0 0.0 11.5 0.0 11.8 13.4 0.0 0.0 9.9 0.0 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.3 6.1 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln2.3 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 2.3 8.2 0.0 0.0 2.9 0.0 0.0LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 12.1 0.0 0.0 11.7 0.0 12.1 19.4 0.0 0.0 10.3 0.0 0.0LnGrp LOS B B B B BApproach Vol, veh/h 219 356 531 295Approach Delay, s/veh 12.1 12.0 19.4 10.3Approach LOS B B B B



10/11/2018







10/11/2018







10/11/2018







10/11/2018





Approach EB WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 20.7 15.1 3.2 0HCM LOS C C

Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBRCapacity (veh/h) 1189 - - 420 359 1148 - -HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.197 - - 0.461 0.009 0.001 - -HCM Control Delay (s) 8.8 0 - 20.7 15.1 8.1 0 -HCM Lane LOS A A - C C A A -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.7 - - 2.4 0 0 - -


APPENDIX VI

ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVENTORY SURVEY

Draft Archaeological Inventory Survey Report for the

Ke‘eaumoku Development Project, (Kona) District, O‘ahu

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077

Prepared for Nan, Inc.

on behalf of Cuzco Development, LLC

Prepared by Brittany Enanoria, B.A., Scott A. Belluomini, B.A.,

and , Ph.D.

(Job Code: WAIKIKI 249)

March 2019

Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: WAIKIKI 249 Management Summary

AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 i

Management Summary

Reference Archaeological Inventory Survey Report for the Ke‘eaumoku Honolulu (Kona) District,

, TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 (Enanoria et al. 2019)

Date March 2019 Project Number(s) Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc. (CSH) Job Code: WAIKIKI 249 Investigation Permit Number

CSH completed the archaeological inventory survey (AIS) fieldwork under archaeological fieldwork permit number 18-15, issued by the Hawai‘i State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) per Hawai‘i Administrative Rules (HAR) §13-282.

Agencies SHPD Land Jurisdiction Cuzco Development USA, LLC Project Proponent Cuzco Development USA, LLC Project Location The project area is located in urban Honolulu on the east side of

Ke‘eaumoku Street spanning the west/central portion of the block extending between Liona Street to the north and Rycroft Street to the south. The project area is depicted on the 1998 Honolulu U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle (see Figure 1).

Project Description The redevelopment plan will involve the demolition of the existing structures on the property and the development of two new residential condominium towers with a commercial component consisting of retail, eating and drinking establishments, offices and other commercial uses. Redevelopment will consist of the entire site with no basement structure, and towers are planned to be about 400 feet (ft) tall and 44 floors high.

The proposed residential towers will include 964 condominium residences, with ancillary common area uses and about 88,000 square (sq) ft of commercial uses, and 1,571 parking stalls. Approximately 37,150 sq ft of open space including a useable park/plaza area will be open for public use.

Project Acreage 3.5 acres (1.41 hectares)

Preservation Regulatory Context

This AIS investigation fulfills the requirements of HAR §13-276 and was conducted to identify, document, and assess significance of any historic properties. This document is intended to support the proposed project’s historic preservation review under Hawai‘i Revised Statutes (HRS) §6E-42 and HAR §13-284, as well as the project’s environmental review under HRS §343. It is also intended to support any project-related historic preservation consultation with stakeholders such as state


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 ii

and county agencies and interested Native Hawaiian and community groups.

The identification and treatment of human skeletal remains discovered during this AIS investigation complied with Hawai‘i State burial law (HRS §6E-43 and HAR §13-300).

An archaeological literature review and field inspection for this project was prepared and submitted to SHPD on 18 April 2018 (Shideler and Hammatt 2018).

CSH archaeologists Jonathan Alperstein, B.A., Brittany Enanoria, B.A., Allison Hummel, M.Sc., Chonni Kehajit, B.A., Chris Konen, B.A., Jay Rapoza, B.A., and Alison Welser, M.A., conducted archaeological fieldwork between and 8 November 2018 under the general supervision of Scott Belluomini, B.A. (Project Director) and Hallett H. Hammatt, Ph.D. (Principal Investigator). This work required approximately 39 person-days to complete.

Consultation 18,

and AIS testing strategy.

, a cultural descendants meeting was held at the project area at Evergreen Adult Day Center (815 Ke‘eaumoku Street) discussing the AIS testing plan focusing on construction plans and an overlay of the historic maps.

The current AIS project and single burial find (State Inventory of Historic Places [SIHP] # 50-80-14-8804) meeting held on 14 November 2018.

22 February 2019 in compliance with HAR §13-284-6(c) requiring consultation for historic properties that may be significant.

A legal notice was published in the Honolulu Star-Advertiser on 28 February 2019, and 1 and 3 March 2019. The same legal notice will also be published in the March newsletter, Ka Wai Ola.

Identified

previously identified and four newly identified historic properties were identified:

SIHP # 50-80-14-6636 (buried wetland soil), is assessed as significant pursuant to HAR §13-284-6, Criterion d (have yielded, or is likely to yield, information important for research on prehistory of history).

SIHP # -8801 (‘auwai/ditch), is evaluated as significant pursuant to HAR §13-284-6, Criterion d (have yielded, or is likely to yield, information important for research on prehistory of history).


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 iii

SIHP # -8802 (buried road), is assessed as significant pursuant to HAR §13-284-6, Criterion d (have yielded, or is likely to yield, information important for research on prehistory of history).

SIHP # -8803 (charcoal enriched A horizon), is assessed as significant pursuant to HAR §13-284-6, Criterion d (have yielded, or is likely to yield, information important for research on prehistory of history).

SIHP # -8804 (human skeletal remains), is assessed as significant pursuant to HAR §13-284-6, Criterion d (have yielded, or is likely to yield, information important for research on prehistory of history) and Criterion e (have an important value to the Native Hawaiian people or to another ethnic group of the state due to its associations with cultural practices once carried out, or still carried out, at the property or due to associations with traditional beliefs, events or oral accounts these associations being important to the group’s history and cultural identity).

Project Effect The proposed project will potentially affect five historic properties (SIHP #s -6636, -8801, -8802, -8803, and -8804) identified within the project area. The project-specific effect is “effect, with agreed upon mitigation commitments” pursuant to HAR §13-284-7.

Mitigation Commitments

The agreed up on mitigation commitments outlined below will reduce the project’s potential effect on the significant historic properties:

Archaeological monitoring (a form of archaeological data recovery) of all ground-disturbing activities is agreed upon for the entire project area.

-site archaeological monitoring will be conducted to identify and document any additional exposures of SIHP #s -6636, -8801, -8802, - 8803, -8804 and any newly identified historic properties that may be identified during construction. An archaeological monitoring plan will be submitted meeting the requirements of HAR §13-279-4 to the SHPD for review and acceptance.

A burial treatment plan meeting the requirements of HAR §13-300-33 will be prepared for SIHP # -8804 identified during this AIS. This burial treatment plan will incorporate appropriate input from the SHPD,

treatment plan is place or relocation of the previously identified human remains.

Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: WAIKIKI 249

AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 iv

Table of Contents Management Summary ............................................................................................................ i

Section 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1

Project Background ....................................................................................................................... 1 Historic Preservation Regulatory Context and Document Purpose ............................................... 1 Environmental Setting ................................................................................................................... 1

1.3.1 Natural Environment............................................................................................................... 1 1.3.2 Built Environment................................................................................................................... 5

Section 2 Methods .................................................................................................................... 7

Field Methods ................................................................................................................................ 7 2.1.1 Pedestrian Survey ................................................................................................................... 7 2.1.2 GPS Data Collection ............................................................................................................... 7 2.1.3 Subsurface Testing .................................................................................................................. 7 Laboratory Methods ....................................................................................................................... 9

2.2.1 Sediment Sample Cultural Content Analysis .......................................................................... 9 2.2.2 Artifact Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 9 2.2.3 Faunal Analysis ...................................................................................................................... 9 2.2.4 Floral Analysis ...................................................................................................................... 10 2.2.5 Disposition of Materials........................................................................................................ 11 2.2.6 Research Methods ................................................................................................................. 11

Section 3 Background Research ........................................................................................... 12

Mythological and Traditional Accounts ...................................................................................... 12 3.1.1 The Goddess Hi‘iaka and ............................................................................................. 16 3.1.2 The Snatching Wind in ................................................................................................ 17 Historical Background ................................................................................................................. 17

3.2.1 Pre-Contact and Early Historic Periods ................................................................................ 17 3.2.2 Traditional Salt Making ........................................................................................................ 24 3.2.3 Little Britain .......................................................................................................................... 25

......................................................................................... 25 3.2.5 Mid- to Late 1800s ................................................................................................................ 30 3.2.6 Development in the 1880s and 1890s ................................................................................... 39 3.2.7 Disease .................................................................................................................................. 39 3.2.8 1900s ..................................................................................................................................... 39 Previous Archaeological Research .............................................................................................. 63

3.3.1 Smith 1989 ............................................................................................................................ 63 3.3.2 Athens et al. 1994 .................................................................................................................. 63 3.3.3 Hammatt and Shideler 1995, 1996 ........................................................................................ 72 3.3.4 Sinoto 2000; McElroy 2010................................................................................................... 72

et al. 2009 ...................................................................... 72 3.3.6 Drennan 2006 ........................................................................................................................ 72 3.3.7 Esh and Hammatt 2006.......................................................................................................... 72 3.3.8 Hammatt 2006a and Hazlett et al. 2008 ................................................................................. 73 3.3.9 Monahan 2006 ...................................................................................................................... 73 3.3.10 Drennan 2007 ...................................................................................................................... 74 3.3.11 Runyon and Hammatt 2007................................................................................................. 74


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 v

3.3.12 McCurdy and Hammatt 2008 .............................................................................................. 74 3.3.13 Tome and Spear 2008 .......................................................................................................... 74

al. 2010 ................................................................................................................ 74 3.3.15 Altizer et al. 2011 ................................................................................................................ 75 3.3.16 Sholin and Dye 2012 ........................................................................................................... 75 3.3.17 Hammatt 2006b and Burke and Hammatt 2012 .................................................................. 75 3.3.18 Medina and Hammatt 2012 ................................................................................................. 75 3.3.19 Hammatt 2013 ..................................................................................................................... 75 3.3.20 Burke et al. 2013 ................................................................................................................. 76 3.3.21 Hunkin et al. 2013 ................................................................................................................ 76 3.3.22 LaChance and Hammatt 2013 ............................................................................................. 76 3.3.23 Morriss et al. 2013 ............................................................................................................... 76 3.3.24 Pammer and McDermott 2014 ............................................................................................ 77 3.3.25 Enanoria et al. 2015 ............................................................................................................ 77 3.3.26 Manirath and Shideler 2016 ................................................................................................ 77 3.3.27 The Makaloa-Sheridan Sam’s Club/Wal-Mart Project ....................................................... 78 Background Summary and Predictive Model .............................................................................. 79

3.4.1 Human Burials ...................................................................................................................... 79 3.4.2 Pre-Contact and Early Post-Contact Agricultural and Habitation Deposits .......................... 79 3.4.3 Potential for Finds ....................................................................................................... 80

Section 4 .............................................................................................. 81

Stratigraphic Summary ................................................................................................................ 81 4.1.1 Test Excavation 1 (T-1) ........................................................................................................ 84 4.1.2 Test Excavation 2 (T-2) ........................................................................................................ 87 4.1.3 Test Excavation 3 (T-3) ........................................................................................................ 90 4.1.4 Test Excavation 4 (T-4) ........................................................................................................ 93 4.1.5 Test Excavation 5 (T-5) ........................................................................................................ 96 4.1.6 Test Excavation 6 (T-6) ...................................................................................................... 100 4.1.7 Test Excavation 7 (T-7) ...................................................................................................... 104 4.1.8 Test Excavation 8 (T-8) ...................................................................................................... 108 4.1.9 Test Excavation 9 (T-9) ...................................................................................................... 113 4.1.10 Test Excavation 10 (T-10) ................................................................................................ 116 4.1.11 Test Excavation 11 (T-11) ................................................................................................ 119 4.1.12 Test Excavation 12 (T-12) ................................................................................................ 123 4.1.13 Test Excavation 13 (T-13) ................................................................................................ 126 4.1.14 Test Excavation 14 (T-14) ................................................................................................ 132 4.1.15 Test Excavation 15 (T-15) ................................................................................................ 135 4.1.16 Test Excavation 16 (T-16) ................................................................................................ 139 4.1.17 Test Excavation 17a (T-17a) ............................................................................................. 142 4.1.18 Test Excavation 18 (T-18) ................................................................................................ 149 4.1.19 Test Excavation 19 (T-19) ................................................................................................ 152

Section 5 Results of Laboratory Analysis .......................................................................... 155

Historic Artifact Analysis .......................................................................................................... 155 5.1.1 Glass Artifact Analysis ....................................................................................................... 155 5.1.2 Miscellaneous Glass Artifacts Analysis.............................................................................. 187 5.1.3 Ceramic Artifact Analysis .................................................................................................. 192 5.1.4 Miscellaneous Ceramic Artifacts Analysis ......................................................................... 204


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 vi

5.1.5 Metal Artifact Analysis ....................................................................................................... 207 5.1.6 Miscellaneous Artifacts ...................................................................................................... 211 Artifacts Summary ..................................................................................................................... 213 Sediment Sample Content Analysis ........................................................................................... 217 Faunal Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 218

5.4.1 Malacology ......................................................................................................................... 219 Pollen Analysis .......................................................................................................................... 220 Wood Taxa Analysis .................................................................................................................. 220

5.6.1 Characteristics of Select Identified Taxa ............................................................................ 222 Radiocarbon Analysis ................................................................................................................ 223

Section 6 ........................................................................... 225

SIHP # 50-80-14-6636 ............................................................................................................... 225 6.1.1 Previous Documentation ..................................................................................................... 228 6.1.2 Current study ...................................................................................................................... 238 6.1.3 Summary ............................................................................................................................. 239 SIHP # 50-80-14-8801 ............................................................................................................... 241 SIHP # 50-80-14-8802 ............................................................................................................... 243 SIHP # 50-80-14-8803 ............................................................................................................... 245 SIHP # 50-80-14-8804 ............................................................................................................... 247

Section 7 Consultation ......................................................................................................... 250

Section 8 Summary and Interpretation ............................................................................. 252

Section 9 Significance Assessments .................................................................................... 254

Section 10 Project Effect and Mitigation Commitments .................................................. 257 Project Effect ........................................................................................................................... 257 Mitigation Commitments ......................................................................................................... 257

Section 11 References Cited................................................................................................. 258

Appendix A LCA Documentation....................................................................................... 276

Royal Patent 02341 to Miller, William ............................................................................................ 276 Royal Patent No. 8241, Ioane Ii, Honolulu, February 1, 1848 ......................................................... 278 LCA No. 100 F. L. to Kekaula, Transcription ..................................................................................... 284 LCA No. 101 F.L. to Kaluaoku, Transcription .................................................................................... 285 LCA No. 566 to John Mitchiner ........................................................................................................ 286 LCA No. 3134 to William Hodge ...................................................................................................... 289

Appendix B Malacological Analysis ................................................................................... 291

Appendix C Pollen and Micro-charcoal Analysis ............................................................. 292

Appendix D Wood Taxa Identification .............................................................................. 293

Appendix E Radiocarbon Analysis ..................................................................................... 297


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 vii

List of Figures Figure 1. Portion of the 1998 Honolulu USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle showing the

location of the project area ...................................................................................................2 Figure 2. Tax Map Key (TMK) [1] 2-3-018 showing the project area (Hawai‘i TMK Service

2014) ....................................................................................................................................3 Figure 3. Aerial photograph of the project area (Google Earth 2013) .............................................4 Figure 4. Portion of a 1998 Honolulu USGS quadrangle topographic map with overlay of Soil

Survey of the State of Hawaii types within and surrounding the project area .....................................................................6

1959:93) showing the relationship of the project area to the trail that would become King Street/Wai‘alae Avenue .....................................................................................................13

Rurick of the south lo‘i, fishponds, and salt pans in relation to the

meaning “Cemetery of Foreigners”). This depiction should be understood as a “sketch” (map reprinted in Fitzpatrick 1986:48–49). .......................................................................20

Figure 7. 1850 sketch by Paul Emmert (original at the Hawaiian Historical Society; reproduced in Grant et al. 2000:5) showing the general lack of habitation and development east of Kawaiaha‘o Church ...........................................................................................................23

Figure 8. 1838 sketch of “Honolulu Salt Pans” drawn by French visitor August Borget (original at Peabody Essex Museum, Salem, Massachusetts) (reprinted in Grant et al. 2000:64–65)............................................................................................................................................23

Britain makai (seaward) of King Street (shown as the seaward of the two parallel paths) (Forbes 1992:136); the present project area included the core habitation area of Little Britain ................................................................................................................................26

Figure 10. Portion of an 1884 Bishop map of Honolulu, Kewalo Section showing project area ..27

project area; also note the extensive saltpans to the west of the project area in Kewalo ...29 showing

the project area (map reprinted in Fitzpatrick 1986:82–83); the wording just seaward of the project area—“Marais [salant] et Pecheries”—means “Salt pans and fishponds” .....31

Figure 13. Portion of 1887 Wall map of Honolulu showing project area......................................33 Figure 14. Photograp

foreground; project area is within the marshlands seen in the upper right background (original photograph at Hawai‘i State Archives, Henry L. Chase Collection; reproduced in Stone 1983:84–85) .........................................................................................................34

..........................35 Figure 16. Portion of 1891 Monsarrat map of Little Britain showing the project area .................36 Figure 17. Portion of 1891 Monsarrat map of Honolulu showing the project area .......................37 Figure 18. Portion of 1893 Wall map of Honolulu showing project area......................................38 Figure 19. 1902 photograph of Kewalo Brine Basins to the west of the project area (Scott

1968:579); caption states the photograph was taken “beyond the shacks, in the vicinity of


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 viii

what is now Ward Street and Kapi‘olani Boulevard, rise the tree-studded slope of Punchbowl and the steep of Tantalus” ...............................................................................40

Figure 20. Portion of 1914 Sanborn Map Company fire insurance map (Sheets 89, 95, and 100) showing project area ..........................................................................................................43

Figure 21. Portion of 1919 U.S. Army War Department fire control map, Honolulu Quadrangle showing project area and expanding street grids ...............................................................45

Figure 22. Portion of 1920 map of Honolulu by M.D. Monsarrat, showing the ‘ili surrounding the project area and the divide by Sheridan Street .............................................................46

..........47 Figure 24. Portion of a 1927 Sanborn Map Company fire insurance map (Sheet 279), showing

the project area ...................................................................................................................48 Figure 25. Kewalo Basin (left foreground), ca. 1930 (Hawai‘i State Archives) ...........................49 Figure 26. 1931 aerial photograph showing dredged materials (white crushed coral) used in the

construction of Kapi‘olani Boulevard and used for fill in marshy areas of Honolulu and

of the project area (Hawai‘i State Archives) ......................................................................49 Figure 27. Portion of 1936 U.S. Army War Department fire control map, Honolulu Quadrangle,

showing the project area ....................................................................................................50 Figure 28. Portion of 1947 Land Court Application 1282 Map 1, Duncan Bell Murdoch

Applicant, showing the northern portion of the project area .............................................51 Figure 29. Portion of 1943 U.S. Army War Department terrain map, Honolulu Quadrangle,

showing continued extenstion of street grids, the undeveloped land around the current project area, and the new Kewalo Basin ............................................................................53

Figure 30. Portion of 1947 Land Court Application 1515 Map 1, Edith Josephine Kapiolani Plews and Juliet Atwood Applicants, showing the project area ........................................54

Figure 31. Portion of 1950 Sanborn Map Company fire insurance map (Honolulu Series, Sheet 279), showing the project area ...........................................................................................55

Figure 32. 1952 Waikiki Coast mauka of the outlined footprint of the Ala Moana Shopping Center and west of a large drive-in theater ...................................................................................................................56

Figure 33. Portion of 1953 Honolulu USGS topographic quadrangle, showing the project area amid recently developed and improved roads in the vicinity ............................................57

Figure 34. Portion of 1959 Honolulu USGS topographic quadrangle showing the project area...58 Figure 35. 1959 USGS Waikiki Coast aerial photograph (UH MAGIS) showing the project area

............................................................................................................................................59 Figure 36. Portion of 1969 Honolulu USGS topographic quadrangle showing project area ........60

..........61 .......................62

Figure 39. Portion of 1998 Honolulu USGS topographic quadrangle showing previous archaeological research in the vicinity of the project area .................................................64

Figure 40. Portion of 1998 Honolulu USGS topographic quadrangle showing previously identified archaeological sites in the vicinity of the project area .......................................69

Figure 41. Google Earth Aerial Imagery (2013) depicting the locations of test excavations (T-1 through T-19) .....................................................................................................................82

Figure 42. T-1 west sidewall, view to west ...................................................................................85


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 ix

Figure 43. T-1 west sidewall profile ..............................................................................................85 Figure 44. T-1 plan view showing Japanese bottles ......................................................................86 Figure 45. T-2 west sidewall, view to northwest ...........................................................................88 Figure 46. T-2 west sidewall profile ..............................................................................................88 Figure 47. T-3 west sidewall, view to west ...................................................................................91 Figure 48. T-3 west sidewall profile ..............................................................................................91 Figure 49. T-4 north sidewall, view to north .................................................................................94 Figure 50. T-4 north sidewall profile .............................................................................................94 Figure 51. T-5 north sidewall, view to northwest ..........................................................................97 Figure 52. Close-up of concrete slab on the northwestern portion of T-5 .....................................97 Figure 53. T-5 north sidewall profile .............................................................................................98 Figure 54. T-6 north sidewall, view to north ...............................................................................101 Figure 55. T-6 north sidewall with SIHP # -8801, view to northwest .........................................101 Figure 56. T-6 north sidewall profile ...........................................................................................102 Figure 57. T-7 south sidewall, view to southwest .......................................................................105 Figure 58. T-7 south sidewall, view to southwest .......................................................................105 Figure 59. T-7 south sidewall profile ...........................................................................................106 Figure 60. T-8 east sidewall, view to south .................................................................................109 Figure 61. T-8 east wall with close-up of SIHP # -6636, view to east ........................................109 Figure 62. T-8 east sidewall profile .............................................................................................110 Figure 63. Historic artifacts from T-8 observed, but not collected ..............................................112 Figure 64. Historic artifacts from T-8 observed, but not collected ..............................................112 Figure 65. T-9 northwest sidewall, view to northwest.................................................................114 Figure 66. T-9 northwest sidewall profile....................................................................................114 Figure 67. T-10 southwest sidewall, view to southwest ..............................................................117 Figure 68. T-10 southwest sidewall profile .................................................................................117 Figure 69. T-11 west sidewall, view to northwest (note water is from a leaking pipe, not the

water table).......................................................................................................................120 Figure 70. T-11 west sidewall profile ..........................................................................................120 Figure 71. Historic artifacts from T-11 observed, but not collected ............................................122 Figure 72. T-12 north sidewall, view to north .............................................................................124 Figure 73. T-12 north sidewall profile .........................................................................................124 Figure 74. Historic artifacts from Strata Ib and IIa that were observed, but not collected ..........125 Figure 75. T-13 north sidewall, view to northwest ......................................................................127 Figure 76. T-13 north sidewall profile .........................................................................................127 Figure 77. T-13 south wall, view to south ...................................................................................128 Figure 78. T-13 south sidewall, close-up of midden area; view to south ....................................128 Figure 79. T-13 south sidewall profile .........................................................................................129 Figure 80. Historic artifacts observed within Strata If and Ig that were observed, but not collected

..........................................................................................................................................131 Figure 81. T-14 northeast sidewall, view to north .......................................................................133 Figure 82. T-14 northeast sidewall profile ...................................................................................133 Figure 83. T-15 north sidewall, view to northeast .......................................................................136 Figure 84. T-15 north sidewall profile .........................................................................................136 Figure 85. T-15 south sidewall, view to south .............................................................................137


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 x

Figure 86. T-15 south sidewall profile .........................................................................................137 Figure 87. T-16 northwest sidewall, view to northwest ...............................................................140 Figure 88. T-16 northwest sidewall profile..................................................................................140 Figure 89. T-17a southeast sidewall, view to east .......................................................................143 Figure 90. T-17a southeast sidewall profile .................................................................................144 Figure 91. T-17a column sample, third down is SIHP # -8803, and bulk sample of SIHP # -8803

Feature 1 at the bottom right, southeast sidewall .............................................................146 Figure 92. T-17a, SIHP # -8803 Feature 1, southeast wall, view to southeast ............................147 Figure 93. T-17a, SIHP # -8803 Feature 1 (left) and Feature 2 (right), southeast wall, view to

northeast ...........................................................................................................................147 Figure 94. T-17a, SIHP # -8803 Feature 3 southeast wall, view to south ...................................148 Figure 95. T-18 north sidewall, view to northeast .......................................................................150 Figure 96. T-18 north sidewall profile .........................................................................................150 Figure 97. T-19 east sidewall, view to southeast .........................................................................153 Figure 98. T-19 east sidewall profile ...........................................................................................153 Figure 99. Acc. # 54, amber beer bottle, export style, manufactured by A. & D.H. Chambers of

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, base to partial finish fragment, two-piece post-bottom mold, applied double oil finish, embossed “A. & D. H. C. / 7” on base....................................173

Figure 100. Acc. # 6, colorless Ajinomoto bottle, mold-blown, two-piece cup-bottom, tooled patent finish, base embossed with “essence of taste” characters, .......................173

Figure 101. Acc. # 42, aqua Star Soda Water Works, soda bottle, one base to body and one body to shoulder fragment, semi-round base, two-piece cup-bottom mold, embossed “[S]TAR

..........................................................175 Figure 102. Acc. # 52, aqua soda bottle, manufactured by Codd, Hiram, & Company, bottled by

Gover’s Bottling Emporium in New Rochelle, New York, base to neck fragment, mold-

PAT. APRIL 29TH 1873 .....................................................................175

Figure 103. Acc. # 51, pale greenish aqua Honolulu Soda Water Company bottle, complete, four-

heel, and Maltese Cross on base ......................................................................................176 Figure 104. Acc. # 55, dark olive amber wine or liquor bottle, base to body fragment, turn mold,

base with mamelon ..........................................................................................................176 Figure 105. 1) Acc. # 56, applied mineral finish; 2) Acc. # 58, prescription finish ....................177

Company and bottled by Sunrise Soda Water Works, complete, machine-made, crown top finish, honeycomb pattern molded on bottle, shoulder embossed “Smile // Smile” in

-I logo) 48 / 2” ..................................................178 Figure 107. Acc. # 34, colorless Coca-Cola hobble-skirt soda bottle, complete, machine-made,

crown top finish, shoulder embossed “Coca-Cola / TRADE-MARK REGISTERED / -105529 // Coca-Cola / TRADE-MARK REGISTERED / MIN.

- - ..................178


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 xi

-Illinois Glass

(Diamond- -C” on base; 2) Acc. # 86, colorless glass bottle, base -Illinois Glass Company at the Alton, Illinois plant,

machine-made, valve mark, stippled base, base embossed “7 (Diamond--Illinois Glass Company,

one body to shoulder fragment, one body fragment, and one base to body fragment, machine-made, basal stippling, orange peel texture on body, base embossed “4 (Diamond- ............................................................................................180

-Way beer bottles, machine-made,

4801 / 1 – WAY” on base; Acc. # 36, embossed “S (interlocking GC logo) 7 / 20 / 4801 / 1 – WAY” on base ...........................................................................................................180

Figure 110. Acc. # 60, amber Anchor Hocking Glass Corporation beer bottle, manufactured at the Connellsville, Pennsylvania plant, base fragment, machine-made, basal stippling, embossed “61-38 / 5 (Anchor-H trademark) 52 / 282” ....................................................182

Figure 111. 1) Acc. # 21, amber Dai Nippon export style beer bottle, complete except for chip in neck/finish, machine-made, crown top finish, embossed “TRADE (sun logo) MARK

and “13 (five-pointed star) 6 / Y” on base; 2) Acc. # 22, olive amber Dai Nippon export style beer bottle, complete except for chip in neck/finish, machine-made, crown top finish, embossed “TRADE (sun logo) MARK (monogram of letters DNB)” on shoulder,

-pointed star) 10 / Y” on base ..................................................................................................................................182

Figure 112. Acc. # 23, amber glass beer bottle, complete, machine-made, crown top finish, embossed “JAPAN / 1” on base; Acc. # 24, olive amber glass beer bottle, base to body fragment, machine-embossed “JAPAN / 5” on base; Acc. # 25, olive amber glass beer bottle, base to body fragment, machine-made, embossed “JAPAN.” on base .................................................183

Figure 113. Acc. # 91, colorless likely hair dye bottle, complete, machine-made, round base, oil finish, embossed with Japanese characters on body that translates to “ten thousand ryou // set amount line” and “MADE IN JAPAN” on heel, dates from 1921 to World War II ..183

Figure 114. Acc. # 89, colorless milk bottle, machine-made, one base to body, one body to shoulder, and one neck to finish fragment, manufactured by Illinois Pacific Glass Corporation and bottled by Honolulu Dairymen’s Association, body embossed

embossed “[HALF] PINT // (IPG in a triangle maker's mark) 1”, and base embossed “HD” with “52” inside valve mark.....................................................................................................184

Figure 115. Acc. # 94, colorless jar, machine-made, two base to body and one body fragment, – 9313” .............................................................185

Figure 116. Acc. # 95, cobalt blue medicine jar, complete, machine-made, large-mouth external ..................186


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 xii

Figure 117. Acc. # 18, cylindrical amber bleach bottle, base fragment, embossed “(Diamond--3”

..........................................................................................................................................186 Figure 118. Acc. # 32, amber glass Lysol Disinfectant bottle, complete, machine-made, small

mouth external thread finish, embossed “Lysol Lysol // Lysol Lysol” on shoulder in

MADE / IN U. S. A.” on base, unidentified maker’s mark .............................................188 Figure 119. Acc. # 90, colorless shoe polish container, complete, machine-made, manufactured

...........................................................188 Figure 120. Acc. # 57, colorless pressed glass, tumbler, base to body fragment ........................189 Figure 121. 1) Acc. # 63 and 2) Acc. # 72, T.T. Pond Company milk glass cosmetics jars, square

shape, machine-made, continuous external thread finish, embossed “Pon side panels; 3) Acc. # 98, milk glass, ointment/cream jar, body fragment, unknown method of manufacture; 4) Acc. # 104, milk glass, cold cream jar, one base to body fragment and one base to finish fragment, machine-made, oval shape, large mouth external thread finish, geometric design relief molded on body; embossed with HA

..............................................................190 Figure 122. 1) Acc. # 49, glass marble, hand-made, transitional, opaque, one rough pontil mark,

swirling white and purple glass, 1896-1901; 2) Acc. # 12, glass marble, machine-made, swirling white, yellow, and green colored glass, post-1910; 3) Acc. # 26, glass marble, machine-made, swirling black, blue, and white colored glass, post-1910; 4) Acc. # 27, glass marble, machine-made, swirling green, yellow, and white colored glass, post-1910..........................................................................................................................................191

Figure 123. Acc. # 16, pale blue aqua flat glass, modern, greater than 3.175 mm ......................191 Figure 124. Acc. # 33, architectural glass, pressed, relief molded, modern ................................193 Figure 125. Acc. # 93, green, modern, household, machine-made ..............................................193 Figure 126. 1) Acc. # 3, earthenware, whiteware, flatware, body fragment, underglaze blue

transfer printed pattern; 2) Acc. # 4, earthenware, whiteware, hollowware, body fragment, underglaze mulberry transfer printed pattern; 3) Acc. # 65, earthenware, whiteware, hollowware, body fragment, underglaze mulberry transfer printed pattern ..194

Figure 127. Acc. # 113, earthenware, hollowware, dish, beaded rim with underglaze red hand-painted band below and underglaze green cut sponge floral motif interior body decoration..........................................................................................................................................194

Figure 128. 1) Acc. # 1, earthenware with edge decoration, whiteware, flatware, plate, body to rim fragment, unscalloped rim with impressed molding in simple pattern, painted under the glaze in blue; 2) Acc. # 61, earthenware with edge decoration, whiteware, flatware, plate, base to rim fragment, unscalloped rim with impressed molding in simple pattern, painted under the glaze in blue ........................................................................................196

Figure 129. Acc. # 75, dipped earthenware, hollowware, body fragment, banded “annular” ware, cobalt blue ........................................................................................................................196

Figure 130. 1) Acc. # 64, whiteware, hollowware, bowl, base to body fragment, no decoration; 2) Acc. # 121, whiteware, hollowware, body fragment, no decoration ...............................197

Figure 131. Acc. # 47, yellowware, body fragment, buff paste, transparent glaze, annular slip ware, engine-turned blue and white bands .......................................................................197


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 xiii

Figure 132. 1) Acc. # 5, porcelain, tableware, base to body fragment, blue hand-painted decoration (possibly pinecones); 2) Acc. # 17, porcelain, hollowware, rice bowl, base to body fragment, underglaze blue hand-painted decoration; 3) Acc. # 68, porcelain, flatware, plate, blue hand-painted border pattern and landscape design featuring building or pavilion, bridge, and willow trees ...............................................................................198

Figure 133. Acc. # 2, Canton porcelain, hollowware, shallow dish, one base to rim and one base to body fragment, border pattern with crisscrossed lattice in blue band above “cloud and rain.” blue and white landscape scene interior base, green to gray glaze on exterior body, no footring, unglazed base, made for export market .......................................................199

Figure 134. Acc. # 84, porcelain, hollowware, teapot, body fragment, exterior brown glaze, interior decorated in hand-painted underglaze blue .........................................................199

Figure 135. Acc. # 66, stoneware, hollowware, ginger jar fragment, green glazed with yellow rim..........................................................................................................................................201

Figure 136. Acc. # 50, stoneware, shouldered food jar lid, small, unglazed, distinct inward bevel on edges ...........................................................................................................................201

Figure 137. 1) Acc. # 105, porcelain, hollowware, rice bowl, one base to body fragment and one body fragment, underglaze cobalt blue hand-painted decoration, “MADE IN JAPAN” stamped on base; 2) Acc. # 109, porcelain, hollowware, tea-bowl, base to rim fragment, “JAPAN” stamped on base ..............................................................................................202

Figure 138. Hand-painted decoration on Japanese ceramics 1) Acc. # 19, 2) Acc. # 43, 3) Acc. # 44, 4) Acc. # 45, 5) Acc. # 46, 6) Acc. # 85, and 7) Acc. # 100 ......................................202

Figure 139. Acc. # 74, porcelain, hollowware, bowl, green and pink underglaze, combination of transfer-print and hand-painted, floral motif ...................................................................203

Figure 140. 1) Acc. # 110, porcelain, hollowware, jar, body to rim fragment, Winter Green with underglaze blue hand-painted floral design and green bands; 2) Acc. # 116, porcelain, hollowware, jar, body to rim fragment, Winter Green with underglaze blue hand-painted decoration .........................................................................................................................203

Figure 141. Acc. # 73, porcelain, flatware, plate, Geisha Girl ware, blue underglaze pagoda, red, black, green, and gold overglaze, gold gilt around rim ...................................................205

Figure 142. 1) Acc. # 67, porcelain, hollowware, small dish, overglaze red hand-painted band interior rim; 2) Acc. # 101, porcelain, hollowware, bowl, body to rim fragment, hand-painted green cross hatching; 3) Acc. # 102, porcelain, hollowware, bowl, cobalt blue hand-painted design .........................................................................................................205

Figure 143. 1) Acc. # 28, earthenware “clay” marble, machine-made, reddish color; 2) Acc. # 69, earthenware “clay” marble, machine-made, tan color .....................................................206

Figure 144. 1) Acc. # 20, porcelain, insulator, knob, multipart mold, finished with a white glaze; 2) Acc. # 103, porcelain, wall tube, unglazed ..................................................................206

Figure 145. Acc. # 112, porcelain insulator, white, dry pressed process, embossed Porcelain Company in Macomb,

Illinois, 1910-1915 ...........................................................................................................208 Figure 146. Acc. # 76, stoneware, toiletware, chamber pot, body, lid, and handle fragments ....208 Figure 147. Acc. # 48, porcelain button, Prosser molded, one piece, round, two eyes, sew-

through, no decoration .....................................................................................................209 Figure 148. Acc. # 123, ceramic door knob, most likely drawer pull, relief molded floral

decoration, dark brown glaze ...........................................................................................209


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 xiv

Figure 149. Metal nails 1) Acc. # 14, 2) Acc. # 7, 3) Acc. # 13, 4) Acc. # 39, 5) Acc. # 77, 6) Acc. # 78, 7) Acc. # 79, 8) Acc. # 80, 9) Acc. # 117, 10) Acc. # 124, 11) Acc. # 62 .....210

Figure 150. Acc. # 81, cartridge fuse, metal, plug type ...............................................................210 Figure 151. Acc. # 114, transportation part, spark plug, metal core and ceramic exterior, used in

car gas engine, underglaze black stamped “AC // 84” on ceramic portion ......................211 Figure 152. Acc. # 128, plastic and metal, plastic plug fuse, top glass window (missing), and “S”

type rejection base with brass contact point, post-1940 ..................................................212 Figure 153. Mica windows for fuses, 1) Acc. # 125 and 2) Acc. # 126 ......................................212 Figure 154. Acc. # 131, bone button, cut/carved, one piece, round, two eyes, poor condition ...213 Figure 155. Acc. # 82, Bakelite, construction, probably used for insulation, post-1902.............214 Figure 156. Acc. # 88, rubber, black, hollow hemisphere, unknown function, post-1851 ..........214 Figure 157. Acc. # 133, milled wood fragments..........................................................................215 Figure 158. Acc. # 70, composite ................................................................................................215 Figure 159. Portion of the 1998 Honolulu USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle overlaying

the current project area and associated test excavations depicting historic properties ....226 Figure 160. Google Earth Aerial Imagery (2013) overlaying the current project area and

associated test excavations depicting historic properties .................................................227 Figure 161. Portion of the 1998 Honolulu USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle depicting

the project area, previous archaeological studies, and interpolated boundaries of SIHP # -6636..................................................................................................................................230

Figure 162. 1927 Kakprevious archaeological studies, and interpolated boundaries of SIHP # -6636 ..............231

Figure 163. Plan view of trench containing SIHP # -8804 (note areas of the remains are drawn as incomplete due to only partial exposure ..........................................................................248

List of Tables

Table 1. Previous archaeological studies in the vicinity of the project area ..................................65 Table 2. Historic properties identified within the vicinity of the project area ...............................70 Table 3. T-1 stratigraphic description ............................................................................................86 Table 4. T-2 stratigraphic description ............................................................................................89 Table 5. T-3 stratigraphic description ............................................................................................92 Table 6. T-4 stratigraphic description ............................................................................................95 Table 7. T-5 stratigraphic description ............................................................................................99 Table 8. T-6 stratigraphic description ..........................................................................................103 Table 9. T-7 stratigraphic description ..........................................................................................107 Table 10. T-8 stratigraphic description ........................................................................................111 Table 11. T-9 stratigraphic description ........................................................................................115 Table 12. T-10 stratigraphic description ......................................................................................118 Table 13. T-11 stratigraphic description ......................................................................................121 Table 14. T-12 stratigraphic description ......................................................................................125 Table 15. T-13 stratigraphic description ......................................................................................130 Table 16. T-14 stratigraphic description ......................................................................................134 Table 17. T-15 stratigraphic description ......................................................................................138


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 xv

Table 18. T-16 stratigraphic description ......................................................................................141 Table 19. T-17a stratigraphic description ....................................................................................145 Table 20. T-18 stratigraphic description ......................................................................................151 Table 21. T-19 stratigraphic description ......................................................................................154 Table 22. Summary of historic artifacts .......................................................................................156 Table 23. Summary of bulk sediment samples ............................................................................217 Table 24. Results of faunal analysis ............................................................................................218 Table 25. Summary of pollen samples .........................................................................................220 Table 26. Identified wood taxa ....................................................................................................221 Table 27. Results of radiocarbon dating analysis ........................................................................224 Table 28. Archaeological historic property integrity, significance, and mitigation

recommendations .............................................................................................................255

Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: WAIKIKI 249 Introduction

AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 1

Section 1 Introduction

Project Background At the request of Nan, Inc., on behalf of Cuzco Development, LLC, Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i,

Inc. (CSH) has prepared this archaeological inventory survey report (AISR) for Ke‘eaumoku Development project, Ahupua‘a, Honolulu District, , TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077. The 3.5-acre (1.41-hectare) project area is located in central/east Honolulu on the east side of Ke‘eaumoku Street spanning the west/central portion of the block extending between Liona Street to the north and Rycroft Street to the south. The project area is depicted on a portion of the 1998 Honolulu U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle (Figure 1), a tax map plat (Figure 2), and a 2013 aerial photograph (Figure 3).

The redevelopment plan will involve the demolition of the existing structures on the property and the development of two new residential condominium towers with a commercial component consisting of retail, eating and drinking establishments, offices and other commercial uses. Redevelopment will consist of the entire site with no basement structure, and towers are planned to be about 400 feet (ft) tall and 44 floors high.

The proposed residential towers will include 964 condominium residences, with ancillary common area uses and about 88,000 square (sq) ft of commercial uses, and 1,571 parking stalls.Approximately 37,150 sq ft of open space including a useable park/plaza area will be open for public use.

This AIS investigation fulfills the requirements of Hawai‘i Administrative Rules (HAR) §13-

276 and was conducted to identify, document, and make significance assessments of any historic properties. This document is intended to support the proposed project’s historic preservation review under Hawai‘i Revised Statutes (HRS) §6E-42 and HAR §13-284, as well as the project’s environmental review under HRS §343. It is also intended to support any project-related historic preservation consultation with stakeholders such as state and county agencies and interested Native

The identification and treatment of human skeletal remains discovered during this AIS investigation complied with Hawai‘i State burial law (HRS §6E-43 and HAR §13-300).

An archaeological literature review and field inspection for this project was prepared and submitted to State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) on 18 April 2018 (Shideler and Hammatt 2018).

Environmental Setting 1.3.1 Natural Environment

The project area is located approximately 1.0 km inland of the coast (at Ala Moana Beach Park and the Ala Wai Yacht Harbor) to the southwest and south. The location is relatively flat and has an elevation approximately 2 m above mean sea level with no adjoining or nearby streams.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 2

Figure 1. Portion of the 1998 Honolulu USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle showing the location of the project area


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 3

Figure 2. Tax Map Key (TMK) [1] 2-3-018 showing the project area (Hawai‘i TMK Service 2014)


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 4

Figure 3. Aerial photograph of the project area (Google Earth 2013)


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 5

Rainfall averages less than 30 inches per year in this area of the Honolulu District (Giambelluca et al. 2013). Northeasterly trade winds prevail throughout the year, although their frequency varies from more than 90% during the summer months to 50% in January; the average annual wind velocity is approximately 10 mAssociates 1998:1–2). The average temperature is 77.6, with an annual high of 84.5 and a low of 70.7 (U.S. Climate Data 2019).

1,800 m mauka (upland) of the project area. The soil of the project area was formed from runoff derived from igneous rock.

The southern portion of the project area was once the edge of a large marshland/wetland was filled in by the late 1920s (see

Figure 23). The marshland/wetland area is related to the Kewalo Wetlands.

Although the project area is currently surrounded by urban development consisting of infrastructure and roadways, the general area contains a few scattered landscaped shurbs and trees including Cassia grandis, various palm trees, and grasses.

database and soil survey data conducted by Foote et al. (1972), the project area is entirely in Kawaihapai clay loam, 0 to 2% slope soils (Figure 4). Kawaihapai soils are described as follows:

This series consists of well-drained soils in drainageways and on alluvial fans on

alluvium derived from basic igneous rock in humid uplands. They are nearly level to moderately sloping. Elevations range from nearly sea level to 300 feet. [Foote et al. 1972:63–64]

For Kawaihapai clay loam, 0 to 2% slope soils, the permeability is moderate, runoff is slow, and the erosion hazard is no more than slight (Foote et al. 1972:64).

1.3.2 Built Environment

The project area is located within east/central Honolulu in a modern urban area surrounded by buildings, streets, sidewalks, and utility infrastructure. More specifically, development around the project area includes the Ala Moana Shopping Center to the southwest, the Sam’s Club/Wal-Mart complex to the northwest, and many restaurants, shops, and businesses around the immediate vicinity (see Figure 3). The project area is within the Keeaumoku International

ting of a variety of businesses including a supermarket, restaurant eateries, a pool hall, and a salon. The complex contains one- to two-story buildings with associated asphalt parking lots.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 6

Figure 4. Portion of a 1998 Honolulu USGS quadrangle topographic map with overlay of Soil

Survey of the State of Hawaii (Foote et al. 1972 ), indicating soil types within and surrounding the project area

Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: WAIKIKI 249 Methods

AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 7

Section 2 Methods

Field Methods CSH archaeologists Jonathan Alperstein, B.A., Brittany Enanoria, B.A., Allison Hummell,

M.Sc., Chonni Kehajit, B.A., Chris Konen, B.A., Jay Rapoza, B.A., and Alison Welser, M.A., conducted archaeological fieldwork between and 8 November 2018 under the and general supervision of Scott Belluomini, B.A. (Project Director) and Hallett H. Hammatt, Ph.D. (Principal Investigator). This work required approximately 39 person-days to complete.

In general, fieldwork included 100% pedestrian inspection of the project area, GPS data collection, and subsurface testing.

2.1.1 Pedestrian Survey

Archaeologists undertook a 100%-coverage pedestrian inspection of the project area for the purpose of historic property identification and documentation. The pedestrian survey was accomplished through systematic sweets spaced 10 m apart. The inventory, documentation, and significance evaluation of potential architectural historic properties are not part of the scope of this AIS. An architectural survey was completed prior to the AIS and it was deemed that no buildings were eligible. Archaeologists documented the general characterisitics of the project area and took general photographs of the project area.

2.1.2 GPS Data Collection

Archaeologists recorded the locations of each of the exterior test excavations using a Trimble -time differential correction. This unit provides sub-

meter horizontal accuracy in the field. GPS field data was post-processed, yielding horizontal accuracy between 0.5 and 0.3 m. GPS location information was converted into GIS shape files

2.1.3 Subsurface Testing

The subsurface testing program was backhoe-assisted and involved 19 test excavations. The testing strategy was based on consultation with the SHPD and cultural descendants. In general, linear trenches measuring approximately 6 m (20 ft) long and 0.6 m (2 ft) wide were excavated within the project area.

An 1891 map of Little Britain showed the first major development of post-Contact human activity within the project area (see Figure 16). The subsurface testing plan placed test excavations to target multiple areas of importance including a former ditch (T-5, T-6, and T-16), former servants’ quarters (T-3), former dwellings (T-7 and T-11), and probable wetlands (T-8, T-9, and T-10). The remainder of the test excavations were placed as general testing areas.

The subsurface testing plan originally consisted of 12 subsurface test excavations (T-1 through T-12). The subsurface testing plan was modified per the request of SHPD in a meeting held on 19 April 2018 for an additional four test excavations (T-1 through T-16). Due to a previously identified burial find within T-11, an additional three trenches were completed around the boundaries of T-11 to determine the possibility of any additional burials or burial clusters in the


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 8

immediate vicinity (T-17 through T-19) (see Figure 41). T-17 was abandoned due to the presence of an active sewer line that broke during excavation activity. Immediately west of T-17, avoiding the route of the sewer line, T-17a was excavated in place of T-17.

All trenches were excavated by a backhoe excavator to sterile material at a base depth ranging from 182 to 240 mbs.

A stratigraphic profile of each test excavation was drawn and photographed. The observed sediments were described using standard USDA soil description observations/terminology. Sediment descriptions included Munsell color, texture, consistency, structure, plasticity, cementation, origin of sediments, descriptions of any inclusions such as cultural material and/or roots, lower boundary distinctiveness and topography, and other general observations. Where stratigraphic anomalies or potential cultural deposits were exposed, these were carefully represented on test excavation profile maps.

Archaeologists photographed the general study area and in-progress work, recording on-the-job procedures, personnel, work conditions, and the area’s natural and/or built environment. Additionally, they photographed all subsurface features, cultural deposits, and profiles. They included a photographic scale and north arrow, as appropriate, in each photograph. They did not take photographs of human remains.

When archaeologists encountered potential historic properties, they documented them as discussed above in addition to illustrating a plan map, if possible. Additional documentation of the potential historic properties included, if possible, size, horizontal extent, descriptions of features, presence and/or absence of surface and subsurface remains, and information that can contribute to the assessments of integrity, function, age, and significance in accordance with HAR §13-276-5.

Human skeletal remains ( ) encountered during one subsurface test excavation (T-11) was handled in compliance with HRS §6E-43 and HAR §13-300 in consultation with the

Hummel, M.Sc., examined and identified all skeletal remains. Following identification of the remains, loose dirt was removed from the area and the osteologist conducted a basic biological profile and skeletal inventory of the exposed remains in the field. During investigation, archaeologists sought a balance between obtaining basic information and disturbing/exposing the remains as little as possible. Documentation of the human remains included hand-drawn plan view/profile maps, a skeletal inventory, and a general, non-metric assessment of a biological profile (i.e., estimation of sex, chronological age, ancestry, and any individualizing characteristics). Following completion of investigation of the respective excavations, all human remains were preserved in place.

The in situ remains were lightly covered with sterile alluvium and plywood boards before backfilling the test excavation. Cultural monitor Mana Caceres ting, Inc., was on site following the exposure of the remains and assisted in the reinterment and temporary preservation in place of all remains. The SHPD was notified immediately of all finds. CSH provided an email summary of the finds to the Sidentification and documentation. Additional investigation within the vicinity of the was conducted only following the concurrence of the SHPD and cultural descendants.

CSH osteologists Allison Hummel, M.Sc., and Alison Welser, M.A., examined and identified all faunal remains in the field; they collected and recorded the provenience for further laboratory


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 9

analysis and curation. When historic artifacts were present within historic fill deposits, CSH archaeologists collected a representative artifact assemblage for laboratory analysis and curation. The representative artifact assemblage was selected to include examples of types of artifacts present and any artifacts with diagnostic features. CSH archaeologists recorded provenience for each artifact collected. CSH personnel cleaned, identified, and tabulated these historic artifacts from fill deposits, providing a sufficient characterization of the types and ages of historic artifacts within these fill deposits.

Laboratory Methods Materials collected during AIS fieldwork were identified and catalogued at CSH’s laboratory

facilities on Analysis of collected materials was undertaken using standard archaeological laboratory techniques. Materials were washed, sorted, measured, weighed, described, and/or photographed.

2.2.1 Sediment Sample Cultural Content Analysis

Sediment samples collected from potential cultural strata and/or features were examined within the CSH laboratory to aid in characterizing the cultural content and chronology of these deposits. Samples were collected and screened in the field and/or collected as bulk samples. All samples were labeled with provenience information, and the volume of each sample was recorded so that comparisons could be made between samples. Samples screened in the field utilized 1/8-inch wire mesh to remove the sedimentary matrix from the cultural content (faunal, floral, and artifactual remains). In the lab, bulk sediment samples were screened through 1/16-inch wire mesh. Wet screening of samples was performed as necessary. As applicable, the cultural material was washed, sorted, measured, weighed, described, photographed, identified, and catalogued.

2.2.2 Artifact Analysis

In general, artifact analysis focused on establishing, to the greatest extent possible, material type, function, cultural affiliation, and age of manufacture. As applicable, artifacts were washed, sorted, measured, weighed, described, photographed, and catalogued. Diagnostic (dateable or identifiable) attributes of artifacts were researched. Historic artifacts were identified using standard reference materials (e.g., Elliott and Gould 1988; Fike 1987; Godden 1964; Kovel and Kovel 1986; Lehner 1988; Lindsey 2014; Millar 1988; Munsey 1970; Toulouse 1971; Whitten 2009; and

Analyzed materials were tabulated and are presented in Section 5.1: Historic Artifact Analysis.

2.2.3 Faunal Analysis

Faunal analysis focused on species identification and evidence of food consumption. For collected invertebrate remains, shell midden was first separated from non-midden shell. Non-midden shell was then weighed as a bulk total with no additional analysis warranted. Shell midden was identified to the lowest possible taxa, weighed, and analyzed. Common shells were identified and analyzed using an in-house comparative collection and reference texts (e.g., Abbott and Dance 1990; Eisenberg 1981; Kay 1979; Titcomb 1979). Carl Christensen, Ph.D. was consulted for identification of rare and/or extinct invertebrates. Collected non-human vertebrate skeletal material was identified to the lowest possible taxa and analyzed using an in-house comparative collection


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 10

and reference texts (e.g., Adams and Crabtree 2012; n 1964; Schmid 1972; Sisson 1953). A catalogue of all collected material was prepared and is presented in Section 5.4: Faunal Analysis.

2.2.3.1 Malacological Analysis

Malacology is a branch of invertebrate zoology concerned with the study of mollusks including

selected from a possible wetland deposit was wet screened using a 1/16-inch screen, and the residue was dried, weighed, and submitted for malacological analysis to Dr. Carl Christensen, Ph.D. The dried residue was examined under a low-power stereomicroscope and all nonmarine mollusks were retained for analysis (Christensen 2019). These results are presented in Section 5.4.1 Malacological Analysis. A full report is presented in Appendix B.

2.2.4 Floral Analysis

Floral analysis included several types of plant analyses including palynological analysis, wood taxa analysis, and radiocarbon analysis.

2.2.4.1 Palynological Analysis

Palynology is the branch of science concerned with the study of pollen, spores, phytoliths, and other palynomorphs. Palynomorphs are often preserved in sediment samples and, following physical and chemical extraction, can be identified with a microscope. This information leads to the types of plants that made up the local environment, or the local watershed, at the time the sediment was deposited. A large amount of palynological research has been conducted oto examine human impacts on native vegetation.

Micro-charcoal particle quantification accompanied the palynological work. The size and amount of these charcoal particles within a sediment sample can indicate the level of human activity in the vicinity at the time the sediment was deposited.

Pollen samples were extracted from a representation of State Inventory of Historic Places (SIHP) # 50-80-14-6636 from bulk sediment samples collected via the excavator bucket. Controlled samples (i.e., column samples) were not collected in the original test excavations due to safety concerns upon entering the trench. The pollen samples were sent to Bruce G. Phillips, M.S. (BGP Consulting, LLC) for pollen and micro-charcoal analysis. These results are presented in Section 5.5 Pollen analysis. A full report is presented in Appendix C.

2.2.4.2 Wood Taxa Analysis

Select samples of charcoal material from intact cultural deposits were analyzed for species identification. Samples were sent to International Archaeological Research Institute, Inc. (IARII) for taxa identification. The samples were viewed under magnification of a dissecting microscope and then compared with anatomical characteristics of known woods in the Pacific Islands Wood Collection at the Department of Botany, University of Hawai‘i, as well as in published descriptions. Taxa identification of wood samples provides useful information for interpreting the environmental and cultural history of the project area and helps determine a general time frame of land use. Analysis by IARII also identified short-lived plant species, which were used for radiocarbon dating. Following analysis, samples were returned to the CSH laboratory. These results are presented in Section 5.6 Wood Taxa Analysis. A full report is presented in Appendix D.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 11

2.2.4.3 Radiocarbon Analysis

Select charcoal samples were submitted to Beta Analytic, Inc. of Miami, Florida, for radiocarbon dating analysis. Charcoal samples from short-lived plant species were selected as they provide a tighter timeframe for possible radiocarbon dates. The samples were analyzed using the accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) method. The conventional radiocarbon age determined by Beta Analytic, Inc. was then calibration program, version 4.2as share-ware over the internet. These results are presented in Section 0 Radiocarbon Analysis. A full report is presented in Appendix E.

2.2.5 Disposition of Materials

Materials collected during the current AIS (excluding human remains and grave goods) will remain temporarily curated at the CSH office in CSH will make arrangements with the landowner regarding the disposition of this material. Should the landowner request different archiving of material, an archive location will be determined in consultation with the SHPD. All data generated during the course of the AIS are stored at the CSH offices.

2.2.6 Research Methods

Background research included a review of previous archaeological studies on file at the SHPD; review of documents at Hamilton Library of the University of Hawai‘i, the Hawai‘i State Archives, the Mission Houses Museum Library, the Hawai‘i Public Library, and the Bishop Museum Archives; study of historic photographs at the Hawai‘i State Archives and the Bishop Museum ArchivesResources. Historic maps and photographs from the CSH library were also consulted. In addition,

database (Waihona ‘Aina 2000).

This research provided the environmental, cultural, historic, and archaeological background for the project area. The sources studied were used to formulate a predictive model regarding the expected types and locations of historic properties in the project area.

Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: WAIKIKI 249 Background Research

AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 12

Section 3 Background Research The project area is in the region of the east/central Honolulu district popularly known as “Ala

Moana” after the very large shopping center developed in 1959 located 600 m to the south. The project area is located east of Sheridan/Pi‘ikoi Street in the traditional land area (‘ilithe Figure 5). Sheridan Street to the west lies on the traditional boundary The following provides a review of the traditional and historical background of

Mythological and Traditional Accounts Kai (coastal was once divided into smaller ‘ili lands including, from west

Kaneloa, Kapua, and

In Fragments of Hawaiian History, John Papa described the “Honolulu trails of about

The trail from Kawaiahao which led to lower Waikiki went along Kaananiau, into the coconut grove at Pawaa, the coconut grove of Kuakuaka, then down to Piinaio

f Kahanaumaikai’s coconut grove, along the border of Kaihikapu pond, into Kawehewehe; then through the center of Helumoa of Puaaliilii, down to the mouth of the Apuakehau stream; along the sandy beach of Ulukou to Kapuni, where the surfs roll in; thence to the stream of

1959:92]

The traditional Hawaiian trails in the vicinity developed into what are now King Street, Ala

project area (see Figure 5). The fact that no major trails or early roads were located in the immediate vicinity is reflective of the extensive marshy area that was avoided, suggesting a lower probability of burials or traditional Hawaiian habitation-related deposits in this area.

such as Punahou and m many sources” (Pukui et al.

three waters” (Kanahele 1995:7–8). The nearest of the streams was Pi‘inaio Stream, which was basically paved over with the development of

the extreme southeast end of Ala Moana Boulevard (between the Ala Wai Yacht Harbor and

uncertain but it could be an allusion to going inland ( ) to the location of a naio (bastardsandalwood; ) tree, as may have commonly grown in the vicinity, to a

1974:77) and has a sense of “waiting,” “loitering,” or “hesitating.” While the nuance is uncertain one could imagine that the mouth of the Pi‘inaio Stream would be a logical place for travelers to


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 13

Figure 5. Portion of Honolulu trails map 1959:93) showing the relationship of the project area to the trail that would become King Street/Wai‘alae Avenue


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 14

pause. believe the place was named after the native tree bifudus) (Clark 2011:437), which Hawaiians used as thatching rods for house roofs (Thrum 1891:95).

had rich fishing grounds and reefs, beaches and tide pools for collecting mollusks, crabs, and seaweed, and swampy areas where saltpans could be built. It was famous for one type of edible seaweed called limu ‘ele‘ele ( ), black limu, which was common along coasts with a freshwater intrusion, such as near the Pi‘inaio Stream or at inland fishponds (Abbott 1984:17). The as dredging and reclamation in-filling has destroyed the ancient breaks.

There are several Kawena Pukui (1983) collected several in her book No‘eau. Hawaiian Proverbs & Poetical Sayings. In addition, John Clark (2011) has recently collected and translated sayings from old Hawaiian language newspapers, which are printed in his book Hawaiian Surfing.

E ho-i, E ho-

Return, return, o Kili‘opu, the fresh waters that fill Kalia. These are the waters of lu rains from the uplands.

[ , 23 April 1864:2; Clark 2011:438]

-eone, ame wai limu nii o Piinaio.

fresh water seaweed of Pi‘inaio stream.

[ , 9 April 1925:5; Clark 2011:438]

Ke kai wawalo leo le‘a o The pleasing, echoing sea of

[Pukui 1983:186]

Ke haaheo ae la i ke kai o Kalia

We are proud of the sea of Kalia.

[ , 22 March 1862:3; Clark 2011:437]

E hoi ka nanai i Ulukou la, Beauty rests in Ulukou.

I ka nalu hoi muku i la, In the waves that break at Kapuni.

Punihei ho au ia la la la, I am taken by him,

I ka leo o ke kai leo nui la. By the great voice of the sea,

Ke wa mai la i Kalia la. It makes a thundering noise at Kalia.

[ , 12 April 1862:4; Clark 2011:438]

o . Fine-grained salt of


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 15

A derogatory expression for the dried, viscid material in the corners of the eyes of

might be used.

[Pukui 1983:144]

‘ai ‘alamihi. ‘alamihi crabs.

[Pukui 1983:110]

was a place where ‘alamihi crabs were once plentiful, leading to a play on the word ‘alamihi (path of repentance), indicating someone who is in a repentant mood (Pukui 1983:110).

Ka i‘a o The fish caught by the men of

he Men are the floaters, men are the sinkers.

.

[Pukui 1983:150]

a school of mullet appeared, a bag net was set and the men swam out in a row, surrounded the fish, and slapped the water together and kicked their feet, thus driving the frightened fish into the

as human fishnets (Pukui

1983:74). The following are accounts relating to the fishing tradition:

Kuu hoa o ka i-a lauahi lima My companion who holds the fishnet at

o Kalia.

[ , 10 April 1862:4; Clark 2011:438]

A sea for surround [nets] is at Kalia.

[Ka Kuokoa, 19 January 1867:1; Clark 2011:438]

re also mentioned:

He kai heenalu ko Kahaloa, The sea for surf-riding is at Kahaloa,

He kai hului ko Kalia, The sea for casting the [bag] net is at Kalia,

He kai hele kohana ko Mamala, A sea for going naked is at Mamala,

He kai au ko A sea for swimming is at Kapuuone,

He kai kaha-nalu ko Makaiwa, A sea for surf-riding sideways is at Makaiwa,

He kai ka anea ko Keehi, A sea for kicking up mullet is at Keehi,

He kai elemihi ko Leleiwi, The sea for small crabs is at Leleiwi,

He Kai awalau ko Puuloa, . . . The sea of many harbors is at Puuloa, . . . [Fornander 1917:4(2):378–379, History of Kuali‘i]


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 16

The mullet were caught on their annual migration from their home in Pearl Harbor oa and going

windward, passing successively Kumumanu, Kalihi, Kou, Kalia, Waikiki, Kaalawai and so on, around to the Koolau side, ending at Laie, and then return by the same course to their starting point. [Keliipio 1900:112]

the reef to the shore were so rich they were (restricted) to anyone but the king and his representatives during certain seasons as described by Clark (2011):

Kalia is one of eight fishing grounds (also called fisheries) on the shoreline of

[Honolulu Advertiser, 11 March 1923:12 in Clark 2011:438]

Penei kana, ‘E hoomaka ana ke kapu ma ka muliwai o Piinaio, a hiki i ke kai o Kalia. Aole loa kekahi e lawaia malaila.’

This is what he said, ‘The restriction will commence at the stream of Pi‘inaoi to the

[Ka , 12 April 1862:4 in Clark 2011:438]

3.1.1 The

Honolulu was once called Kou, named for the most beautiful woman on Kou composed a mele (chant) to her husband which includes some of the place names of coastal Honolulu and

Ke kal

–297]


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 17

Translation:

The surf rises, stirred up by the Ko‘olau wind

Waves burst in the hue-streaked sea

Sprinkling the flowers drifting in the harbor

To my love who has gone

The star of that smooth strata, oh

Wait all day until night

Friends shall meet in Kou.

2008b:277]

The chant ends with the phrase “Friends shall meet in Kou [Honolulu].” In her journey around -

Hi‘iaka stopped at Pu‘uloa (Pearl Harbor) and met some people who were about to travel to Honolulu for the festival of a great chiefess. Hi‘iaka decided to attend the festival and departed on a canoe, bidding her friends at Pu‘uloa that “Kou is where we will meet again,” thus echoing a saying first pronounced by the chiefess Kou.

3.1.2 The Snatching Wind in

kahuna (priest, advisor) who was skilled in hana aloha sorcery. The kahuna told the man to find a container with a lid and then speak into it of his love for his wife. The kahuna then uttered an incantation into the container, closed it, and threw it into the sea. The wife was fishing one morning at and saw the container. She opened the lid and was possessed by a great longing to return to her husband. She walked until she found a canoe to take her home. This story led to the saying:

. The love-snatching

[Pukui 1983:158]

3.2.1 Pre- Periods

The ‘ili more populated and cultivated centers of Kou (present-day Hosystem of irrigated taro lo‘i (irrigated fields) fed by streams descending from Makiki, and

Kou—the area of downtown Honolulu surrounding the harbor—possessed shoreward fishponds


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 18

and irrigated fields watered by ample streams descending from Nu‘uanu and Pauoa valleys. The pre-Contact population and land use patterns may have derived from its relationship to these two densely populated areas to the west and east. Thus, an attempt to reconstruct the region around the current project area as it existed for the Hawaiians during the centuries before Western Contact and modern urbanization must begin with accounts of Kou and Wai

3.2.1.1

encompassing lands stretching from Honolulu to Maunalua Bay. Within that , by the time of the arrival of Europeans during the late eighteenth century, the area today known as had long been a center of population and

fourteenth century had become “the ruling seat of the chiefs of The preeminence century and was confirmed in 1809 by the decision of

Kamehameha I, in the midst of unifying control of the Islands, to move his court there after

Chiefly residences, however, were only one element of a complex of features that characterized -Contact times. Beginning at least by the fifteenth century, a vast system

aiians living in the

landscape.

An 1831 visitor to the Islands, a Prussian botanist named Dr. F.J.F. Meyen (cited in Pultz 1981)

way took us through the plain along the beach which was only sparsely covered with grass. Not until we came to the village of Waititi, where running and standing water is in abundance, did we see the taro fields and precious coconut plantations which stretch almost right up to the ocean shore. Under the scant shadow of these trees stand the quaint huts of the Indians. [Pultz 1981:52]

Samuel Kamakau in 1865 wrote the following:

Cultivating was a great occupation of the chiefs, and the land of was made productive through cultivation—from the inland side to the coconut grove beside the sea. The chiefs constructed many ponds and stocked them with fish, and they made irrigation ditches about the land that led into the fishponds and the taro pond fields. . . .

Kalamakua-a-

and the other lo‘i [irrigated t

A sizeable population developed amidst this Hawaiian-engineered abundance. Captain George arriving at “Whyteete” in 1792, captured something of this profusion in his journals:


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 19

appeared numerous, large, and in good repair; and the surrounding country pleasingly interspersed with deep, though not extensive valleys; which, with the plains near the sea-side, presented a high degree of cultivation and fertility.

[We] found the plain in a high state of cultivation, mostly under immediate crops of taro; and abounding with a variety of wild fowl, chiefly of the duck kind . . . The sides of the hills, which were at some distance, seemed rocky and barren; the intermediate vallies, which were all inhabited, produced some large trees, and made a pleasing appearance. The plain, however, if we may judge from the labour bestowed on their cultivation, seemed to afford the principal proportion of the different vegetable productions on which the inhabitants depend for their

–164]

Kotzebue, commander of the Russian Ship Rurick (Figure 6). The map depicts the landscape in the vicinity of the project area in the first decades following Western Contact. It shows a concentration of house sites and agricultural fields along Nu‘uanu Stream at Honolulu and house and agricultural fields in the three-scattered habitations and agricultural fields along the coast forming a “break” between these heavily populated and cultivated centers. The coastal area is characterized by fishponds, salt ponds

lo‘i (rectangular areas depicting irrigated fields) around the streams descending from Nu‘uanu and

valleys, and habitation sites (indicated by the trapezoids). According to the map, the current project area was not in a habitation or agricultural area but was indeed in a low-lying area marked by ponds. For Kotzebue, a major landmark in the area was a foreigners’ cemetery with a wall depicted as arcing around the north and west sides. While the actual location of the depicted foreigners’ cemetery remains uncertain it appears well north of the present project area.

Already in the early nineteenth century when these maps were made, the traditional Hawaiian

changing, disrupted by the same Euro-Americans who first documented in writing (including the records cited above) that traditional life. The of Honolulu—with the only sheltered harbor

—became the center for trade with visiting foreign vessels, drawing increasing numbers of Hawaiians away from their traditional environments. The shift in preeminence is illustrated by

following:

ur path led us along the borders of extensive plats of marshy ground, having raised banks on one or more sides, and which were once filled with water, and replenished abundantly with esculent fish; but now overgrown with tall rushes waving in the wind. The land all around for several miles has the appearance of having once been under cultivation. I entered into conversation with the natives respecting this present neglected state. They ascribed it to the decrease of population. [Chamberlain 1957:26]

Cultu

ral S

urve

ys H

awai

‘i Jo

b Co

de: W

AIK

IKI 2

49

Back

grou

nd R

esea

rch

AIS

R fo

r the

Ke‘

eaum

oku

Dev

TMK

s: [1

] 2-3

-018

:052

–060

, 074

, 075

, and

077

20

Fi

gure

6. P

ortio

n of

Ru

rick

lo

‘i,

fishp

onds

, and

salt

pans

in re

latio

n to

the

proj

ect a

rea;

not

e th

e lo

catio

n of

a c

emet

ery

(labe

lem

eani

ng “

Cem

eter

y of

For

eign

ers”

). Th

is d

epic

tion

shou

ld b

e un

ders

tood

as a

“sk

etch

” (m

ap re

prin

ted

in F

itzpa

trick

19

86:4

8–49

).


AISR for the Ke‘eaumoku Devel

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 21

(where, by the 1820s, the population was estimated at 6,000 to 7,000) but also of the European diseases that had devastating effects upon the Hawaiian populace. however, was not total and the continued to sustain Hawaiians living traditional lifestyles into the nineteenth century. Land Commission Award (LCA) records from the 1840s indicate awardees continuing to maintain fishponds and irrigated and dryland agricultural plots on a greatly reduced scale than had been possible previously with adequate manpower.

3.2.1.2 Kou (Honolulu)

A basic description of Honolulu (Kou), up to Western Contact, is given by E.S. Craighill Handy and Elizabeth Handy:

What is now Honolulu was originally that flatland area between the lower ends of

‘Honolulu was probably a name given to a very rich district of farm land near what is now . . . the junction of Liliha and School Streets, because its chief was Honolulu, one of the high chiefs at the time of Kakuhihewa.’ . . . It is probable that the chief referred to by Westervelt took his name from the harbor and adjoining land. The original name of the land where the town grew when the harbor became a haven for foreign ships was Kou. . . . The number of heiau in this area indicates that it was a place of first importance before the era of foreign contact. [Handy and Handy 1972:479]

Rev. Hiram Bingham, arriving in Honolulu in 1820, described a still predominantly Native Hawaiian environment—still a “village”—on the brink of western-induced transformations:

We can anchor in the roadstead abreast of Honolulu village, on the south side of the island, about 17 miles from the eastern extremity. . . . Passing through the irregular village of some thousands of inhabitants, whose grass thatched habitations were mostly small and mean, while some were more spacious, we walked about a mile northwardly to the opening of the valley of Pauoa, then turning southeasterly, ascending to the top of Punchbowl Hill, an extinguished crater, whose base bounds the northeast part of the village or town. . . . Below us, on the south and west, spread the plain of Honolulu, having its fishponds and salt making pools along the seashore, the village and fort between us and the harbor, and the valley stretching a few miles north into the interior, which presented its scattered habitations and numerous beds of kalo (arum esculentum) in its various stages of growth, with its large green leaves, beautifully embossed on the silvery water, in which it flourishes. [Bingham 1847:92–93]

Punchbowl Hill”

“plain of Honolulu, having its fishponds and salt making pools along the seashore” (Bingham 1847:92–93).

Another visitor to Honolulu in the 1820s, Captain Jacobus Boelen, hints at the possible pre-



TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 22

It would be difficult to say much about Honoruru [Honois the harbor or the basin of that name (which as a result of variations in pronunciation is also written as Honolulu, and on some maps, Honoonoono). The landlocked side in the northwest consists mostly of tarro [sic] fields. More to the north there are some sugar plantations and a sugar mill, worked by a team of mules. From the north toward the east, where the beach forms the bight of Whytetee

the soil around the village is less fertile, or at least not greatly cultivated. [Boelen 1988:62]

Boelen’s description implies th

east. A sketch by Paul Emmert in 1850 (Figure 7) shows the general absence of habitation and

during the first half of the nineteenth century. Gorman D. Gilman, who arrived in Honolulu in 1841, recalled in a memoir the limits of Honolulu during the early 1840s:

The boundaries of the old town may be said to have been, on the makai side, the waters of the harbor; on the mauka side, Beretania Street; on the side [i.e., the area just beyond Punchbowl Street], the barren and dusty plain, and on the Ewa side, the Nuuanu Stream. [Gilman 1903:97]

Gilman further describes the “barren and dusty plain” beyond (east of) Punchbowl Street:

The next and last street running parallel [he had been describing the streets running mauka-makai, or from the mountains to the shore] was that known as Punchbowl Street. There was on the entire length of this street, from the makai side to the slopes of Punchbowl, but one residence, the two-story house of Mr. Henry Diamond, mauka of King Street. Beyond the street was the old Kawaiahao church and burying ground. A more forsaken, desolate looking place than the latter can scarcely be imagined. , to see it in its present attractiveness of fences, trees and shrubbery, can hardly believe its former desolation, when without enclosure, horses and cattle had free access to the whole place. [Gilman 1903:89]

That the environs of the missionary enclave and Kawaiaha‘o Church were indeed “forsaken” and “desolate looking” in the 1820s when the missionaries first settled there is confirmed in the memoirs of the American missionary C.S. Stewart. Arriving on Maui after living at the mission, Stewart declared Lahaina to be “like the delights of an Eden” after “four weeks residence on the dreary plain of Honoruru” (Stewart 1970:177). It is likely these descriptions of the Honolulu plain also include—at least for western sensibilities— barrenness of the area east of old Honolulu is illustrated in a number of sketches, one made in 1850 (Figure 7). The current project area would be found near the shore in an area relatively devoid of habitations or industry. An 1887 photograph (see Figure 14) shows more clearly the marshy nature of the area, with only scattered houses near the ponds or near the shore.



TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 23

Figure 7. 1850 sketch by Paul Emmert (original at the Hawaiian Historical Society; reproduced

in Grant et al. 2000:5) showing the general lack of habitation and development east of Kawaiaha‘o Church

Figure 8. 1838 sketch of “Honolulu Salt Pans” drawn by French visitor August Borget (original

at Peabody Essex Museum, Salem, Massachusetts) (reprinted in Grant et al. 2000:64–65)



TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 24

3.2.2 Traditional Salt Making

(salt) (see Figure 8 and Figure 19) although the major salt works were probably in Kaka‘ako just to the west. The Hawaiians traditionally used salt to flavor food, to preserve fish, for medicines, and for ceremonial uses.

Captain Cook was the first person to note the method of making salt in prepared “saltpans”:

Amongst their arts, we must not forget that of making salt, with which we were amply supplied, during our stay at these islands, and which was perfectly good of its kind. Their saltpans are made of earth, lined with clay; being generally six or eight feet square, and about eight inches deep. They are raised upon a bank of stones near the high-water mark, from whence the salt water is conducted to the foot of them, in small trenches, out of which they are filled, and the sun quickly performs the necessary process of evaporation. . . . Besides the quantity we used in salting pork, we filled all our empty casks, amounting to sixteen puncheons, in the Resolution only. [Cook 1784:151]

In the next years following the arrival of Captain Cook in 1778, most visitors were British and American fur traders, who stoppto stock up on food and water, but another concern was to buy or trade for salt, which was used to

ue’s (1821) visit in 1816 and 1817, he noted that, “Salt and sandalwood were the chief items of export” (cited in Thrum 1904:50).

The journals of none mention the object of call other than for refreshments, though one, 3 some years later, records the scarcity and high price of salt at the several points touched at, with which to serve them in the curing of furs obtained on the coast. In all probability salt was the first article of export trade of the islands and an object, if not the object, of these pioneer furtraders’ call. [Thrum 1904:45]

The missionary William Ellis, on a tour of the Hawaiian Islands in 1822 and 1823, also noted these salt pans and recorded the final step of crystallization:

The natives of this district (Kawaihae) manufacture large quantities of salt, by evaporating the sea water. We saw a number of their pans, in the disposition of which they display great ingenuity. They have generally one large pond near the sea, into which the water flows by a channel cut through the rocks, or is carried thither by the natives in large calabashes. After remaining there for some time, it is conducted into a number of smaller pans about six or eight inches in depth, which are made with great care, and frequently lined with large evergreen leaves, in order to prevent absorption. Along the narrow banks or partitions between the different pans, we saw a number of large evergreen leaves placed. They were tied up at each end, so as to resemble a narrow dish, and filled with sea water, in which the crystals of salt were abundant. [Ellis 1827:403–404]

Salt making thrived into the early to mid-nineteenth century, until a decline in the export of salt in the late nineteenth century, as noted below.



TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 25

3.2.3 Little Britain

The plain west of Kou (west of present day Punchbowl Street) and east of Pi‘inaio Stream in

low level of traditional Hawaiian occupation with just a few salt pans and fishponds and east/west trending trails. This pattern of low level land use continued into the mid-1850s.

A major exception was “Little Britain,” a development sponsored by General William Miller (1795-1861) who was the first British consul general in Hawai‘i (he served from 1844–1855). He was particularly famous for negotiating a treaty by which England acknowledged Hawai‘i’s independence. General Miller’s home and office were on the northeast corner of (the old) Miller Street and Beretania Street (near the present ‘Iolani Palace) and was called by him “‘Beretania Cottage’, from which the street [Beretania Street] takes its name” (Paske-Smith 1936:17).

General Miller’s land holdings included an extensive area of inland, western that included the entirety of the present project area which he held in two land grants (Grant 1290 and Grant 2341, Figure 10). An early oil painting by James Gay Sawkins, ca. 1851 (Figure 9) depicts the fenced community of Little Britain makai of King Street (shown as the seaward of the two parallel paths, the parallel more mauka [inland] path is Beretania Street). The buildings depicted in the enclosed compound included a dwelling, a cook house, a storehouse, a bowling alley, a small hospital, and cottages for rent, which made the estate “a place of leisure and recreation until the last quarter of the century, long after Miller’s tenure” (Forbes 1992:137). The Sawkins painting (see Figure 9) gives a good feeliwith Little Britain really sticking out as an exceptional focus of activity. Little Britain included a large fenced area of pasturage but is understood to have had a relatively dense compound of western-style and traditional Hawaiian thatched houses near the inland portion of the fenced lands. The Sawkins painting is believed to be a highly accurate portrayal of the area ca. 1851.

Little Britain would indeed remain a focus of leisure and recreation. An account of a 5 July 1887 celebration at Little Britain was estimated to include at least 5,000 people with the King and virtually everyone of any importance in the kingdom attending (Hawaiian Gazette 5 July 1887). Quite large trash deposits might be expected from such fetes.

3.2.4

—the division of Hawaiian lands—which introduced private property into Hawaiian society. In 1848, the crown, the Hawaiian government, and the ali‘i (chiefly class) received their land titles. The common people ( ) began to receive their kuleana awards (individual land parcels) in 1850. It

at the first specific documentation of life in the area, as it had evolved up to the mid-nineteenth century, come to light.

Among the first descriptions of the Kaka‘ako area by Hawaiians themselves are the testimonies

LCA records indicate traditional Hawaiian usage of the region and its environs may have been confined to salt making and farming of fishponds, with some wetland agriculture in those areas mauka

Cultu

ral S

urve

ys H

awai

‘i Jo

b Co

de: W

AIK

IKI 2

49

Back

grou

nd R

esea

rch

AIS

R fo

r the

TMK

s: [1

] 2-3

-018

:052

–060

, 074

, 075

, and

077

26

Fi

gure

9rit

ain

mak

ai (s

eaw

ard)

of K

ing

Stre

et (s

how

n as

the

seaw

ard

of th

e tw

o pa

ralle

l pat

hs) (

Forb

es 1

992:

136)

; the

pre

sent

pro

ject

are

a in

clud

ed th

e co

re

habi

tatio

n ar

ea o

f Litt

le B

ritai

n


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 27

Figure 10. Portion of an 1884 Bishop map of Honolulu, Kewalo Section showing project area


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 28

valleys. The testimonies indicate the area was lived on and shaped by Hawaiians before the nineteenth century. The LCA records also reveal that midway through the nineteenth century, taro cultivation, traditional salt making, and fishpond farming activities continued within the These activities and the land features that supported them were eliminated, or buried, during the remainder of the nineteenth century by the urbanization of Honolulu. The LCA records along with historic maps and archival photographs document more precisely traditional Hawaiian settlement and subsequent historic land usage within and around the present project area.

An 1884 map by S.E. Bishop shows the Honolulu plain amid the encroaching development of Honolulu Town (see Figure 10). Marshlands surrounding the project area have not yet been filled and integrated into urban Honolulu. The map also shows the disposition of LCAs, land grants, and Royal Patents recorded near the current project area.

Grant 1290 and Grant 2341 (“Malookahana”) were awarded to William Miller (the present project area is within Grant 1290) (see Figure 10). Unfortunately, Land Grants do not typically include land use data.

Two Land Commission Awards (LCAs 566 and 3134) were granted to Europeans immediately northeast of the project area. The LCA 566 testimony for John Mitchiner notes his understanding that the land is “situated in Kapawaa, Waititi.” “The claimant states that he received it from the King in the year 1831—and that he has ever since occupied it in peace, after erecting several buildings upon it.” The LCA 3134 testimony for William Hodges notes he received the land from a Lascar (a sailor from India or Southeast Asia) named in the claim as Serang and known by the native name of Pokini who gave it to the claimant on payment of some undefined consideration in the year 1841. The only reference to land use is John Mitchiner’s mention of erecting several buildings. The Sawkins painting (see Figure 9) appears to show a smaller, separate compound just east of Little Britain and this likely relates to the constructions of John Mitchiner.

The Loko fishpond and LCA 8241:2 adjacent, located 200 m to the south, were awarded to John Papa (1800–1870), a member of the ali‘i who was a famous Native Hawaiian educator,

later sold it to the government.

Land Grant 2790 was sold in 1861 as part of a large 82-acre parcel to Lot Kamehameha, who

Bishop Trust, lands inherited by Bernice Pauahi Bishop, a great-granddaughter of Kamehameha I (Day 2004:11, 69; Waihona ‘Aina 2000).

the 1884 map by S.E. Bishop (see Figure 10) three “Fort Lands” parcels (LCA 100 F.L. and LCA 101 F.L parcels 1 and 2) are shown 500 m to the southwest. The Fort Lands (designated by the F.L. in the LCA awards) designates a land award for military service to the Kamehameha dynasty. Land Commission Award 100 F.L. to Kekaula is recorded as consisting of “2 fish ponds, 5 fish ponds, 1 patch, house site, and a pasture in one section of land” (Native Testimony 1847:10:304). Adjacent to Kekaula’s parcel, LCA 101 F.L. to Kaluaoku included “two ponds and three small kiopuaa ponds for young fish and one lo‘i” (Native Register 1847:3:764).

The ‘ili of Kewalo, west of Sheridan Street, was awarded to Kamake‘e Pi‘ikoi, a member of the ali‘i Covington (Figure 11) points out the major LCA 10605 land holding just to the west. The ‘ili of


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 29

Figure 11. Portion of 1881 Covington Hawaiian Government Survey m ‘ahu showing the

project area; also note the extensive saltpans to the west of the project area in Kewalo


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 30

returned it to the government. It then became Fort Land, land set aside so soldiers manning the fort

proved impractical, and many of these lands were later awarded to other ali‘i or commoners, or assigned as Government or Crown Lands. There were 47 kuleana

lands.

The land to the southwest of the project area (the ‘ili awarded to the king, but he returned it to the government. The 1881 Covington map (see Figure 11) points out the major LCA 387 land holding just to the southwest of the present project area. This land was then awarded to the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions (ABCFM). Testimonies describe the land—identified as “Punahou”:

The boundaries of that part which lies on the sea shore we cannot define so definitely, but presume there will be no difficulty in determining them, as it is commonly known as pertaining to Punahou. This part embraces fishing grounds, coral flats & salt beds. [Land Commission Award 387]

3.2.5 Mid- to Late 1800s

A map of Honolulu drawn in 1855 by Joseph de LaPasse, a lieutenant aboard the French vessel L‘Eurydice, shows fishponds and taro lo‘i/agricultural fields (irrigated patches, shown as rectangles) seaward of the project area (Figure 12). Houses can be seen scattered along King Street and the clump of houses depicted in the immediate vicinity of the present project area is the core Little Britain compound (see Figure 9). The LaPasse map should be viewed as somewhat schematic.

The depicted areas of population and habitation concentration probably reflect distortions caused by the post-Contact shift of Hawaiians to the area around Honolulu Harbor—the only

Kamehameha himself had moved from to Honolulu in 1809. The 1855 LaPasse map does appear to show “Marais [salant] et Pecheries” meaning “Salt pans and fishponds” to the southwest, south, and southeast of the project area (see Figure 12). This may indicate intensifying land development in response to increasing foreign and internal demand for salt and food. The indications of the low lying nature of the lands to seaward supports the notion that habitation tended to be further inland—starting just makai of King Street.

Several early maps show very little development in the vicinity of the project area during the nineteenth century (other than Little Britain). The area mostly appears to consist of fishponds, taro lo‘i, and saltpans. An 1881 map by R. Covington shows the project area Pawa‘a (see Figure 11). The rectangle depicted just north of “Pawaa” on the Covington 1881 map shows the core Little Britain compound.

The 1884 Bishop map (see Figure 10indicates the Little Britain compound was the largest development in the entire area. No other activity in the vicinity is indicated othannotated “Kam. Gov’t” (King Lot Kamehameha government). Sheridan Street is shown 100 m west of the project area in what is believed to have been an area of high ground.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 31

Figure 12

the project area (map reprinted in Fitzpatrick 1986:82–83); the wording just seaward of the project area—“Marais [salant] et Pecheries”—means “Salt pans and fishponds”


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 32

An 1887 map by Walter A. Wall shows the project area in an irregularly shaped fenced enclosure (the settlement of Little Britain) (Figure 13). The fence line around the core Little Britain residential compound as shown on the 1884 map (see Figure 10) appears to have been extended to the south to include the entirety of General Miller’s Grant 1290 and Grant 2341. The map shows the development of urban Honolulu progressing mauka of the area, and also shows in greater detail the houses within the Little Britain community, the structures of which are shown lying entirely within the present project area.

An 1887 photo (Figure 14) shows the vicinity of the project area as low-lying marshlands with several expanses of water and scattered huts visible (particularly close to the coast).

An 1891 Dodge map of (Figure 15) shows much the same land use pattern as earlier maps with the Little Britain compound being the only major enterprise. As was first indicated in the 1884 Bishop map (see Figure 10), it is now clearer that the formal entrance driveway to Little Britain was from Sheridan Street (rather than from King Street). The Little Britain compound has one great house with three wings extending off to the northeast and southeast and three outlying structures to the north. The owner is listed as J.N. Wright on this 1891 map (General William Miller died in 1861 but he was so integral to the origin of Little Britain that his name was associated with the property for decades).

An 1891 Monsarrat map specifically shows Little Britain (Figure 16) and provides our greatest detail of the main dwelling with three wings extending off to the northeast and southeast and three outlying structures to the north, a fenced in area on the south corner, and depiction of a separate cottage, a separate servants’ quarters, a garden area, and a ditch that bisects the present project area northeast/southwest which was crossed by two bridges.

A map of Honolulu also by Monsarrat in 1891 (Figure 17) shows much the same scene with the added detail of what appears to be a large building identified as “Independence Park” between the project area and King Street.

An 1893 map by Walter A. Wall depicts the swamp lands around the region, with extensive rice fields directly east of the project area, and Sheridan Street bordering the Little Britain fenced lands to the west (Figure 18). Development is shown taking place just inland of the “Beach Road” (future Ala Moana Boulevard) which was a coastal berm of higher ground that to some extent contained the water of the indicated “swamp.” There is very little development in the vicinity south of King Street. Ten discrete buildings appear to be shown as part of the Little Britain compound within the project area.

The southern area around the annotation “swamp” was clearly low lying, close to the water table, and has not been associated with traditional Hawaiian habitation deposits or burials (Hawaiians generally did not live or bury their dead there because the water table was so high. However, the Walmart project on the east side of Sheridan Street indicates a strip of high ground existed where Sheridan Street was developed. This suggests caution in the interpretation of the extent of the marshy “swamp.” With fair certainty we can say the Little Britain community depicted in the several buildings just south of King Street was more of a dusty plain than a “swamp” (see Figure 9).


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 33

Figure 13. Portion of 1887 Wall map of Honolulu showing project area

Cultu

ral S

urve

ys H

awai

‘i Jo

b Co

de: W

AIK

IKI 2

49

B

ackg

roun

d Re

sear

ch

AIS

R fo

r the

TMK

s: [1

] 2-3

-018

:052

–060

, 074

, 075

, and

077

34

Fi

gure

14

seen

in th

e up

per r

ight

bac

kgro

und

(orig

inal

pho

togr

aph

at H

awai

‘i St

ate

Arc

hive

s, H

enry

L. C

hase

Col

lect

ion;

repr

oduc

ed

in S

tone

198

3:84

–85)


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 35

Figure 15. Portion of 1891 Dodge map of Kalia, Waik showing project area


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 36

Figure 16. Portion of 1891 Monsarrat map of Little Britain showing the project area


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 37

Figure 17. Portion of 1891 Monsarrat map of Honolulu showing the project area


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 38

Figure 18. Portion of 1893 Wall map of Honolulu showing project area


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 39

3.2.6 Development in the 1880s and 1890s

Maps of the 1880s and 1890s (see Figure 10, Figure 11, Figure 13, Figure 17, and Figure 18) record an “arm” of streets projecting from downtown Honolulu into the mauka portion of the plain

remained open and the maps reveal that much of the region had become rice fields, while other areas were designated as marsh lands.

3.2.7 Disease

Honolulu was exposed to a wide variety of deadly diseases in the nineteenth century with great loss of life particularly amongst the Native Hawaiian population that had little immunity to these diseases. Disease hospitals were generally established outside the core area of growing Honolulu and often those who died in these epidemics were buried near the hospitals.

For example, in 1881, a branch leprosy hospital or receiving station for cases of Hansen’s Disease was opened in Kaka‘ako, in a block now bound by Ala Moana, Auahi, Coral, and Keawe streets (west of the project area) (Griffin et al. 1987:55). Thrum reports victims of the cholera epidemic of 1895 were treated at the Kaka‘ako Hospital, so the buildings must have remained or been rebuilt (Thrum 1896:101). In the Kaka‘ako area during the 1853 smallpox epidemic patients were isolated at a temporary quarantine camp, and a hospital was set up (Thrum 1896:98). of the disease were buried at the Honuakaha Cemetery near the modern junction of Quinn Lane and South Street (Griffin et al. 1987:13).

This pattern is noted in the context of Little Britain where we are told there was “a small hospital” (Forbes 1992:137). The presence of a small hospital, which may have been established during the 1853 smallpox epidemic, suggests a possible elevated potential for human skeletal remains in the vicinity.

3.2.8 1900s

3.2.8.1 Salt Making into the Twentieth Century

The export of salt declined in the late nineteenth century. Thrum states the apex of the trade was in 1870, but by 1883 (Thrum 1923:116), he noted that “pulu, salt and oil have disappeared entirely” from the list of yearly exports (Thrum 1883:68). Salt continued to be manufactured for local use. By 1916, only one salt works, the Honolulu Salt Company, was still in operation. A 1902 photograph (Figure 19) shows the extensive salt beds of the Kewalo area, in an area probably west of the project area.

The Chinese were involved in salt production, usually in concert with their management of

ca. 1900) from salt pans bordering the sea, which were fed continually with seawater by the tides:

Both the natural tides and the Chinese method of peddling a wooden wheel that transported water upward, helped to keep the salt beds damp with about three inches of water. After a few months, the senior Mau would drain off the remaining water and use a wooden rake with deep prongs to break up the salt. When the bed was dry a flat rake was used to flatten and smooth out the salt. Later it was raked into piles, packed in cloth bags and distributed. [Chong 1998:108]


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 40

Figure 19. 1902 photograph of Kewalo Brine Basins to the west of the project area (Scott

1968:579); caption states the photograph was taken “beyond the shacks, in the vicinity of what is now Ward Street and Kapi‘olani Boulevard, rise the tree-studded slope of Punchbowl and the steep of Tantalus”


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 41

3.2.8.2 Early Twentieth Century Land Reclamation Projects

The justification for filling in low lying areas most frequently cited was public health and sanitation, the desire to clean up rivers and ponds that were reservoirs for diseases (such as cholera) and that acted as breeding places for rats and mosquitoes. The first areas to be filled in were those areas closest to Honolulu Town, then out toward Kaka‘ako and (Griffin et al. 1987:13). The first fill material may have been set down for the Kaka‘ako Leper Branch Hospital (between Coral and Keawe streets), which had been built on a salt marsh. Laborers were hired to “haul in wagonloads of rubble and earth to fill up that end of the marsh” (Hanley and Bushnell 1980:113). Although public health and safety were prominently cited, according to Nakamura (1979), the

re room for residential subdivisions, industrial areas, and finally tourist resorts.

Although the Board of Health could condemn a property and the Department of Public Works could then fill in the land, the process was rather arbitrary and piecemeal. In 1910, after an epidemic of bubonic plague, the Board of Health condemned a large section of Kewalo, consisting

contained numerous ponds (Hawaii Department of Public Works 1914:196).

The superintendent then sent a letter to all the property owners, informing them that they must

complied and filled their land with a variety of materials. Most of the landowners did not comply with this notice and in 1912, the bid to fill in the land was given to Lord-Young Engineering Company to fill in the land with “sand, coral and material dredged from the harbor or reef and the depositing of the same upon the land by the hydraulic method” (Hawaii Reports 1915:331). The recalcitrant landowners sued to stop the work. The expense of the suit did manage to shut down operations planned for the area from Ward St –160). This land was mainly owned by the Bishop Estate, who leased the land to small farmers growing taro and rice and raising ducks in the ponds. In 1916, the Bishop Estate announced that as soon as their present tenant leases expired, they planned to fill the lands and divide them into residence and business lots (Larrison 1916:148–149).

Wai Drainage Canal—begun in 1921 and completed eight years later—resulted in the draining and

final result was a “canal three miles long, with an average depth of twenty-five feet and a breadth of two hundred fifty feet” (Honolulu Advertiser 16).

The first action was to dig a canal parallel to the coast along Beach. The dredged material was placed on adjacent properties from McCully Street to Kapi‘olani Park. This action affected several private landowners, including the Bishop Estate and the Booth Estate. The second action was to dredge a canal from the beach toward the reef. The material dredged was pumped to the new McKinley High School site, an area of former large ponds adjacent to the eastern boundary of the mauka portion of the Ward Estate (Hawaii Governor 1922:49–50). Additional dredged material was used to fill the area makai of the school grounds in 1930 (Hawaii Governor 1930:74).


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 42

Several claims were made subsequently against the Hawaiian Dredging Company, including compensation for destroyed crops and livestock by farmers. For instance, a Chinese tenant farmer

m the Bishop Trust Company, wrote a letter of complaint indicating the salt water that leached into his lands as a result of the dredging of the canal had devastated his fishponds and stocks of ducks and chickens (letter from Chang Fow to the Bishop Trust Company, 23 May 1922, cited in Nakamura 1979:100–101). His claims, along with those of other residents of the area, give an impression of the continuing agricultural subsistence base in that lasted into the 1920s, but rapidly became a thing of the past.

In Nakamura’s (1979:113) , he writes that this land “ ‘reclamation’ program changed the ecology of from a once viable and important agriculture and aquaculture center . . . destroyed by profit-seeking capitalist entrepreneurs . . . under the subterfuge of ‘drainage’ and ‘sanitation.’ ” Many of the original property owners lost their land or had serious damage to their property as a result of the reclamation activities and/or the costly expense for the mandatory filling in of their properties.

In 1919, the Hawaii Government appropriated $130,000 to improve the small harbor of Kewalo for the aim of “harbor extension in that it will be made to serve the fishing and other small craft, to the relief of Honolulu harbor proper” (Thrum 1919:147). As the area chosen for the harbor area was adjacent to several lumber yards, the basin was initially made to provide docking for lumber schooners, but by the time the wharf was completed in 1926, this import business had faded, so the harbor was used mainly by commercial fishermen. The dredged material from the basin was

Estate in the coastal area east of Ward Avenue (U.S. Department of the Interior 1920:52). In 1941, the basin was dredged and expanded to its current 55 acres. In 1955, dredged material was placed along the makai side to form an 8-acre land section protected by a revetment.

Thus the process of land fill in the vicinity of the project was carried out over a long period of time in conjunction with a number of major municipal projects. The use of dredged materials (white crushed coral) in the construction of Kapi‘olani Boulevard is quite evident in a 1931 aerial photograph (see Figure 26). Much of the raising of the marshy ground surface in the vicinity of the present project area is, however, believed to have been accomplished by landowners using terrestrial soil as fill material.

3.2.8.3 Urban Development

A 1914 Fire insurance map (Figure 20) shows a much different situation in the vicinity of the project area than the maps of the 1890s. A large number of tenements occupy the central portion of the project area. A new street, “Custer Av,” is shown as entering the project area from the northwest approximating the former Little Britain driveway from Sheridan Street (compare to Figure 15). A flume indicated as elevated 10 ft off the ground approximates the alignment of the former ditch (see Figure 16) bisecting the project area. Rice fields are indicated as present in the seaward portion of the project area with banana groves just to the southeast. The Chinese Consulate is located 20 m west of the project area and it may be the case that some of the small structures in the northwest corner of the project area relate to that Consulate.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 43

Figure 20. Portion of 1914 Sanborn Map Company fire insurance map (Sheets 89, 95, and 100)

showing project area


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 44

A 1919 U.S. Army War Department map (Figure 21) and 1920 map by Monsarrat (Figure 22) ore the construction of the Ala Wai

Canal. These maps show the grid of streets extending out from downtown Honolulu to the north (mauka) of the project area and encroaching upon the project area from the north and west. Lands immediately south of the project area are still undeveloped and are believed to still be in agriculture (the last years of rice cultivation and banana patches).

By this time, property in the surrounding area was owned by Walter Dillingham, who purchased it to use as a dump site for the coral dredged during such projects as the construction of the Ala Wai Canal. This western portion of one day to be the site of Ala Moana Center, was truly a low lying marsh area. The 1919 map also shows there are still many ponds in the eastern part of Kaka‘ako, especially at the future site of McKinley High School and the area along the coast, which would later be developed into Ala Moana Shopping Center and Park.

The 1920 map depicts the relationship of the (then proposed) Ala Wai dredging to the (then proposed) development of Kapi‘olani Boulevard and the Ala Moana area. Little Britain still exists as a defined land area much as it had for 60 years. The “proposed Boulevard” shown south of the present project area was never built.

The 1927 aerial photograph (Figure 23) portrays with clarity a sharp distinction between the majority of lands of the project area that are well above the water table and support extensive housing and large trees and the lower lying lands just seaward that are divided into small agricultural plots (probably truck farms of vegetables). The land 100 m seaward is in much larger, roughly square patches that had probably recently been in rice production. Most of the project area appears to have been substantially developed in housing by this time (1927).

The fire insurance map of that same year (Figure 24) shows the extensive housing development within the project area at the southwest end of Custer Avenue. The proximity of the “Japanese Baths,” 10 m to the west, suggests this area may have been ethnically quite Japanese by this time.

Aerial photographs of the early 1930s (Figure 25 and Figure 26) indicate the open areas of are in the process of being filled with material dredged from the Ala Wai Canal, Ala

Moana Beach Park, and Kewalo Basin and with material from the city incinerator at the Kewalo coastline. A 1931 aerial photograph (see Figure 26) shows large white areas recently covered with dredged material and crushed coral. The largest white section west of the project area is the future site of McKinley High School. In 1928, work began on Kapi‘olani Boulevard, commencing at the intersection of South and King streets. By 1931 the boulevard had reached Sheridan Street and by

Figure 27).

This reclamation effort and the completion of Kapi‘olani Boulevard was associated with the establishment of a grid of streets and rapid development. The approximate alignment of Ke‘eaumoku and Makaloa streets is depicted on the 1933 map (see Figure 27) but they almost certainly were not paved if they existed on the ground at all (compare with the aerial photograph from six years earlier, Figure 23).

A 1939 Land Court Application 1282 map (Figure 28) for adjacent lands to the northeast shows no such grid of streets. This map shows the former William Miller Grant 2341 as owned by the Anna S. Wright Estate (presumably having inherited the project lands from J.N. Wright who was shown as the landowner in 1891) (see Figure 15). The name “Independence Park Lots” is shown


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 45

Figure 21. Portion of 1919 U.S. Army War Department fire control map, Honolulu Quadrangle

showing project area and expanding street grids


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 46

Figure 22. Portion of 1920 map of Honolulu by M.D. Monsarrat, showing the ‘ili surrounding the project area and the divide by

Sheridan Street


AISR for the Ke‘

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 47

Figure 23. 1927


AISR for the Ke‘

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 48

Figure 24. Portion of a 1927 Sanborn Map Company fire insurance map (Sheet 279), showing

the project area


AISR for the Ke‘

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 49

Figure 25. Kewalo Basin (left foreground), ca. 1930 (Hawai‘i State Archives)

Figure 26. 1931 aerial photograph showing dredged materials (white crushed coral) used in the

construction of Kapi‘olani Boulevard and used for fill in marshy areas of Honolulu and

west of the project area (Hawai‘i State Archives)


AISR for the Ke‘

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 50

Figure 27. Portion of 1936 U.S. Army War Department fire control map, Honolulu Quadrangle,

showing the project area


AISR for the Ke‘

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 51

Figure 28. Portion of 1947 Land Court Application 1282 Map 1, Duncan Bell Murdoch

Applicant, showing the northern portion of the project area


AISR for the Ke‘

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 52

extending into the north portion of the project area. A large structure was seemingly associated with the name “Independence Park” on an 1891 Monsarrat map (see Figure 17) in this area but the history of the land development is unclear.

moved out to the newer subdivisions away from Honolulu’s central area. A 1943 U.S. Army War Department map (Figure 29) shows continuing development of street grids extending out from downtown Honolulu but generally few changes in the immediate region, although by this time the landscaping of the new Ala Moana Park has been completed. Although the grid of streets west of Sheridan Street appears to have been paved since 1933, the alignments of Ke‘eaumoku and Makaloa remain unpaved and buildings are still few and far between.

A 1947 Land Court Application 1515 map (Edith Josephine, Kapiolani Plews and Juliet Atwood, applicants) (Figure 30) shows the project area as divided up mostly into fairly large regular lots (numbered 23 through 27) facing (the future) Ke‘eaumoku Street with smaller lots (19, 20, 29, and 30) in the northwest corner of the project area.

A 1950 Sanborn fire insurance map (Figure 31) shows a far more chaotic distribution of dwellings similar to that depicted on the 1927 fire insurance map (see Figure 24). The area has become more light industrial in nature with lumber storage, sign painting, a soy factory, and coffee roasting and a furniture warehouse just outside the project area to the west and a sheet metal shop within the project area. The Japanese Temple 30 m west of the project area continues to suggest a strong Japanese presence in the ethnic makeup of the neighborhood.

A 1952 aerial photograph (Figure 32) appears to show a new development within the southern portion of the project area of 15 regular buildings in a three-by-five building pattern, quite likely apartment buildings. A drive-in theater is a major landmark 200 m to the southeast. This aerial photograph shows the neighboring lands to the southwest as developed and occupied by low-rise commercial buildings, but it may be noted that the grid of streets east of Ke‘eaumoku Street shown as early as 1933 (see Figure 27) appears to have no reality yet. Ke‘eaumoku Street (which was not shown on the 1950 map, see Figure 31) is now at least roughed in.

Figure 33) depicts development within the vicinity. The map shows the area of Ala Moana Center as a solid block and the location of the KGMB radio tower, which broadcast its first hour of television in 1952. The Tachikawa School 350 m west of the project area reflects the continuing strong Japanese ethnic presence. A grid of streets is still largely absent east of Ke‘eaumoku Street and is still somewhat haphazard west of Ke‘eaumoku Street.

The 1959 USGS map (Figure 34) still does not show cross streets east of Ke‘eaumoku Street (other than the beginning of Liona Street) but does show early Ala Moana Shopping Center construction.

The 1959 aerial photograph (Figure 35) shows a much different configuration of buildings than depicted on the 1950 Sanborn Map Company fire insurance map (see Figure 31). a much more orderly arrangement of structures organized perpendicular to the new Ke‘eaumoku Street. Dwellings have largely been superseded by commercial buildings. The Custer Avenue alignment is almost undistinguishable.

The 1969 USGS map (Figure 36), shows a grid of streets imposed on the Ke‘eaumoku neighborhood including a relatively new eastern extension of Rycroft Street on the makai side of


AISR for the Ke‘

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 53

Figure 29. Portion of 1943 U.S. Army War Department terrain map, Honolulu Quadrangle,

showing continued extenstion of street grids, the undeveloped land around the current project area, and the new Kewalo Basin


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 54

Figure 30. Portion of 1947 Land Court Application 1515 Map 1, Edith Josephine Kapiolani Plews and Juliet Atwood Applicants,

showing the project area


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 55

Figure 31. Portion of 1950 Sanborn Map Company fire insurance map (Honolulu Series, Sheet

279), showing the project area


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 56

Figure 32. 1952 Waikiki Coast aerial p

mauka of the outlined footprint of the Ala Moana Shopping Center and west of a large drive-in theater


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 57

Figure 33. Portion of 1953 Honolulu USGS topographic quadrangle, showing the project area

amid recently developed and improved roads in the vicinity


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 58

Figure 34. Portion of 1959 Honolulu USGS topographic quadrangle showing the project area


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 59

Figure 35. 1959 USGS Waikiki Coast aerial photograph (UH MAGIS) showing the project area


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 60

Figure 36. Portion of 1969 Honolulu USGS topographic quadrangle showing project area


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 61

Figure 37. 1970 Waikiki Coast aerial p showing the project area


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 62

Figure 38 aerial photograph, Honolulu quadrangle


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 63

the project area. In addition to the Tachikawa School, the Makiki Japanese Language School is prominent 300 m to the northwest of the project area attesting to the continuing Japanese ethnic presence. By 1970 the project area appeared much as it does today. The demolition of the Civic Auditorium, just to the north, was a major change to the area in the 1970s (compare Figure 37 and Figure 38).

Previous Archaeological Research The region of surrounding the project area contains historic properties of both pre-Contact

and post-Contact origin. Most traditional Hawaiian surface demolished by the time of the first scientific archaeological surveys. McAllister (1933:80), in his

1930, says of Honolulu, “Information regarding former sites within the present limits of Honolulu must come entirely from literary sources.” The

of local and federal government buildings and by state-planned redevelopment.

The immediate vicinity of the project area has been generally delimited to the area between

in the previous archaeological research comprise mostly fieldwork endeavors that conducted subsurface testing and contribute to the expected stratigraphic and cultural findings of the area. Thefollowing is a summary of these archaeological studies. Previous archaeological research in the immediate vicinity of the project area is shown in Figure 39 and summarized in Table 1. Previously identified archaeological historic properties in the vicinity are depicted in Figure 40 and are summarized in Table 2.

3.3.1 Smith 1989

In 1989, SHPD was notified of four bone fragments found by construction workers in a property at 1341 Kapi‘olani Boulevard, on the southeast corner of Kapi‘olani Boulevard and Pi‘ikoi Street. Smith (1989) determined one was a human right tibia shaft fragment, and the remaining fragments were pig bones. The human bone was designated as SIHP # 50-80-14-4243.

3.3.2 Athens et al. 1994

In 1994, IARII was contacted after a construction crew from Hawaiian Dredging Company inadvertently discovered human skeletal remains while excavating a trench for an underground telephone line near the northeast corner of Pi‘ikoi Street and Kapi‘olani Boulevard (Athens et al. 1994). The site was designated SIHP # -4847, and the remains were disinterred. An osteological analysis reported the remains were those of a 12- to 15-year-old female of Polynesian/Hawaiian ancestry. The individual had a severe bone infection of the right pubis, which was the probable cause of death. Radiocarbon analysis of a sample of bone collagen yielded a date of death of between AD 1295 and AD 1473, supporting the osteological determination of Polynesian/ Hawaiian ancestry. The remains were interred within a wetlands environment at a shallow depth of 50-80 cm below surface. The presence of the remains within an unusual wetlands context suggested the location of the remains did not reflect an intentional burial. The individual may have passedaway at the very spot of interment and remained undiscovered.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 64

Figure 39. Portion of 1998 Honolulu USGS topographic quadrangle showing previous

archaeological research in the vicinity of the project area


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 65

Table 1. Previous archaeological studies in the vicinity of the project area

Reference Type of Study Location -80-14****)

Smith 1989 Inadvertently discovered human remains

1341 Kapi‘olani Blvd, near Pi‘ikoi St

SIHP # -4243, isolated human right tibia shaft fragment found in a disturbed context

Athens et al. 1994

Inadvertently discovered human remains

Pi‘ikoi St and Kapi‘olani Blvd intersection

SIHP # -4847, subadult human burial dating to ca. 1450s

Hammatt and Shideler 1995

Archaeological inventory survey

Convention Center No clear evidence of pre-Contact occupation observed; no historic properties identified

Hammatt and Shideler 1996

Archaeological data recovery

Convention Center Determined vast majority of in situ sediments overlying limestone hardpan date back no further than AD 1520 to 1690

Sinoto 2000 Archaeological literature review and field inspection

Makaloa St Sam’s Club/ Wal-Mart

No historic properties identified; noted some remains may still be present

Hammatt 2004 Archaeological monitoring

Kapi‘olani Blvd

Kamake‘e

Excavations directly on top of prior trenches; no historic properties identified

Drennan 2006 Archaeological assessment (no finds AIS)

Approx. 7.0- acre parcel at Shriners Hospitals lands, in the ‘ili (TMK: [1] 2-4-007:001)

No historic properties identified

Esh and Hammatt 2006

Archaeological monitoring

Pi‘ikoi St from Ala Moana Blvd to Matlock St


Hammatt 2006a Archaeological inventory survey

Ala Moana Center

SIHP # -6847, a small, subsurface feature (wooden box with chopsticks, brushes, a bead, animal bones) dating to late nineteenth/ early twentieth century


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 66


Hammatt 2006b Archaeological literature review and field inspection

1391 Kapi‘olani Blvd (TMK: [1] 2- 3-039:011)

Discusses possibility of intact prehistoric and early Contact cultural deposits associated with Hawaiian habitation below modern fill layers; report also finds a likelihood burials could be encountered within project area

Monahan 2006 Archival and field research on archaeology and history

Approx. 7.0-acre parcel at Shriners Hospitals

Thirteen stratigraphic trenches yielded no finds of any historic and/or cultural significance; no human remains or bones of any kind observed; appears to be earlier draft of Drennan 2007 study

Drennan 2007 Archaeological inventory survey

Two parcels approx. 4930 sq m

s: [1] 2-4-005:026 and 027)

SIHP # -6909, comprised of 19 subsurface features: historical fill deposits, building foundations, and trash and midden deposits representative of historical period in Honolulu

Runyon and Hammatt 2007


Intersection of

Fern St


Hazlett et al. 2008


Ala Moana Center No historic properties identified

McCurdy and Hammatt 2008

Archaeological investigation

Makaloa Substation (TMK: [1] 2-3-021:027)

No historic properties identified; however, pond/wetland soils encountered and tested

Tome and Spear 2008

Archaeological assessment

0.4899-acres in Makiki on

between Beretania and Young St (TMKs: [1] 2-4- 006:017 and 018)


Fong et al. 2009 Archaeological monitoring

Along Kapi‘olani Blvd, Kamake‘e St, and Atkinson Dr



AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 67


McElroy 2010 Archaeological monitoring

Makaloa-Sheridan Sam’s Club/ Wal-Mart

Human remains (MNI = 64) found in six areas assigned SIHP #s -6516, -6661, and -6662; both pre-Contact and post-Contact burials

2010 Archaeological literature review and field inspection with limited subsurface testing

Safeway/ Schuman Carriage Property, Makiki Ahupua‘a

Research of historic documents and previous archaeological studies indicated low potential for intact cultural deposits in project area, including pre-Contact deposits, historic deposits, and possibly pre-Contact and post-Contact burials

Altizer et al. 2011


Kapi‘olani area Encountered previously documented SIHP # -6636, original wetland surface of Kewalo area

Sholin and Dye 2012


ve No historic properties identified; subsurface deposits lacked cultural material

Burke and Hammatt 2012


1391 Kapi‘olani Blvd parcel

SIHP # -7193, a historic trash layer

Medina and Hammatt 2012


Safeway project, Makiki Ahupua‘a (TMKs: [1] 2-4- 011:008, 009, 010, 011)

identified (SHIP # -7212), a post-Contact trash pit containing refuse dating from 1880–1920

Burke et al. 2013 Archaeological inventory survey

Two cultural resources identified: SIHP # -7415, historic-era (1900s) structural remnants; SIHP # -7416, wetland deposits (possible lo‘i)

Hammatt 2013 Archaeological inventory survey

Honolulu High Capacity Transit Corridor project, City Center (TMKs: [1] 1-2, 1- 5, 1-7, 2-1, 2-3 [various plats and parcels])

Identified 19 historic properties; three located within scope of previous archaeological studies section: SIHP # -6636, a wetland deposit, SIHP # -7193, a subsurface historic trash deposit, and SIHP # -7430, a subsurface privy remnant


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 68


Hunkin et al. 2013


Walgreens Kapi‘olani redevelopment (TMKs: [1] 2-3-021:008, 009, and 010 [present project area])

Two archaeological historic properties identified: SIHP # -6636, former wetland deposits for the region, and SIHP # -7431, historic structural remnants associated with past industrial and commercial land use in 1950s

LaChance and Hammatt 2013


Project located

Ave between Kapi‘olani Blvd and Philip St


Morriss et al. 2013


Ala Moana Center ‘Ewa Mall Expansion (TMK: [1] 2-3-038:001)

Documented a previously identified former wetland surface (SIHP # -6636)

Pammer and McDermott 2014


Park Lane project at Ala Moana Center (TMK: [1] 2-3-038:001 por.)

Two historic properties identified: a former wetland surface (SIHP # -6636) and a historic trash deposit (SIHP # -7596)

Enanoria et al. 2015


Walgreens Kapi‘olani redevelopment, E corner of Kapi‘olani Blvd and Ke‘eaumoku St

Two historic properties identified: a former wetland surface (SIHP # -6636) and a historic trash layer (SIHP # -7757)

Manirath and Shideler 2017


641 Ki‘iaumoku St (TMKs: [1] 2-3-021:037 and 039 [present project area])

Further documents SIHP # -6636, the previously identified subsurface Kewalo wetlands, including pond sediments, berm(s), and a possible associated coral boulder and cobble retaining wall and wooden post


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 69

Figure 40. Portion of 1998 Honolulu USGS topographic quadrangle showing previously

identified archaeological sites in the vicinity of the project area


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 70

Table 2. Historic properties identified within the vicinity of the project area

50-80-14

Description Comments Reference

-4243 Human burial right tibia shaft fragment found in a disturbed context

Smith 1989

-4847 Human burial -adult human burial dating to ca. 1450s

Athens et al. 1994

-6516 Human burial Including BFS 1, 3, 4, and 5, near Makaloa St / Sheridan St intersection

McElroy 2010

-6636 Subsurface wetland sediments

Pre- and post-Contact (widespread and noted in ten or more archaeological studies)

Altizer et al. 2011; Clark and Gosser 2005; Hunkin et al. 2013; Morriss et al.

Pammer and McDermott 2014; Runyon et al. 2011; Runyon et al. 2012

-6661 Human burial Designating BFS 2, near NE end of Sheridan St

McElroy 2010

-6662 Human burial Designating BFS 6, near NE end of Sheridan St

McElroy 2010

-6847 Wood-lined subsurface feature

Small, subsurface feature (wooden box with chopsticks, brushes, a bead, animal bones) dating to late nineteenth / early twentieth century

Hammatt 2006a

-6909 Subsurface cultural deposit and infrastructure

Comprised of 19 subsurface features: historical fill deposits, building foundations, and trash and midden deposits representative of late 1800s in Honolulu

Drennan 2007

-7193 Historic trash deposit

Early twentieth century trash including various glass, ceramic, and metal items and fragments

Burke and Hammatt 2012; Hammatt 2013

-7212 Subsurface refuse deposit

Post-Contact trash pit containing refuse dating from 1880–1920

Medina and Hammatt 2012

-7415 Historic structural remnants

Historic-era (1900s) structural remnants

Burke et al. 2013

-7416 Wetland sediments

Pre- and post-Contct wetland deposits (possible lo‘i)

Burke et al. 2013


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 71

50-80-14

Description Comments Reference

-7430 Historic privy remnant

Post-Contact subsurface privy remnant

Hammatt 2013

-7431 Historic structural remnant

Historic structural remnants associated with past industrial and commercial land use in the 1950s

Hunkin et al. 2013

-7596 Historic trash deposit

Historic trash fill layer consisting of concentration of trash within blackened sediment used as fill material to raise original ground surface between ca. 1927 and 1947

Pammer and McDermott 2014

-7757 Historic trash pit Consisting of secondary deposit of fill containing numerous glass bottles associated with post-Contact (early to mid-twentieth century) commercial and residential activity

Enanoria et al. 2015

-9766 Board of Agriculture Forestry Building

Completed 1930, significant example of Mediterranean Revival architecture in Hawai‘i; building also significant as the work of architect Louis Davis

Hawai‘i Register of Historic Places (HRHP)

-9830 Hawaii Shingon Mission

Built in 1917, mother church of Shingon sect in Hawai‘i; one of most highly decorated temples in the Islands, built in a “Japanese Design Style”

National Register of Historic Places (NRHP)


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 72

3.3.3 and Shideler 1995, 1996

In 1994, CSH performed an AIS for the convention center project involving the excavation of ten test trenches and five cores (Hammatt and Shideler 1995). They determined there was no clear evidence of pre-Contact occupation. CSH later performed archaeological data recovery for the project and determined the vast majority of in situ sediments overlying the limestone hardpan date back no further than AD 1520 to 1690 (Hammatt and Shideler 1996). Also, no clear evidence of

identified.

3.3.4 Sinoto 2000; McElroy 2010

Aki Sinoto Consulting conducted an archaeological literature review and field inspection (titled an archaeological assessment) (Sinoto 2000) for Makaloa-Sheridan Sam’s Club/Wal-Mart project. Archaeological monitoring of the project was conducted from 2002 to 2004 (McElroy 2010). Human remains (minimum number of individuals [MNI] = 64) were observed in six areas within the project parcel and were designated SIHP #s -6516, -6661, and -6662. They appear to represent both pre-Contact and post-Contact burials.

The Makaloa-Sheridan Sam’s Club/Wal-Mart project is described in more detail in Section 4.1.25, due to the nature of the historic properties present and the close proximity of the findings in relation to the current project area.

3.3.5 et al. 2009

From August to 2004, CSH conducted archaeological monitoring for emergency sewer and Hammatt 2004). Five 0.6-m deep trenches

were excavated. Excavations took place solely in fill materials associated with the original placement of the sewer pipes. No historic properties were identified.

In 2009, CSH completed archaeological monitoring of construction associated with the upgrading of existing drainage, water, and sewer systems within Kapi‘olani Boulevard from

Street and within Atkinson Drive from Kapi‘olani Boulevard to Ala Moana Boulevard (Fong et al. 2009). No historic properties were identified. Stratigraphy consisted primarily of imported fill material associated with utility and road construction. In some instances, pockets of naturally deposited sediment (Jaucas sand and wetland clays) were identified beneath fill deposits.

3.3.6 Drennan 2006

Scientific Consultant Services Inc. (Drennan, 2007) conducted an AIS for an approximately 7.0-acre parcel at the Shriners Hospitals lands, in the ‘ili of Pawa‘a, TMK: [1] 2-4-007:001. Thirteen stratigraphic trenches collectively totaling 42.6 m in length were excavated to an average depth of 128 cm below ground surface (cmbs). No human remains or, in fact, bones of any kind, were observed and no subsurface features of any kind were identified.

3.3.7 Esh and 2006

In August 2004, CSH conducted archaeological monitoring for the Rehabilitation of Streets, Unit 5B on Pi‘ikoi Street between Ala Moana Boulevard and Matlock Street (Esh and Hammatt 2006). Monitoring was only required at the intersection of Pi‘ikoi and Young streets, as


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 73

excavations in other areas did not extend deeper than 30 cm below base course fill. No cultural materials were identified.

3.3.8 and al. 2008

In late 2005 and early 2006, CSH conducted an AIS of the Ala Moana Expansion project (Hammatt 2006a). Testing included 30 trenches in the parcel designated as “Project Area 1” which is directly makai (south) of the current project area, across the street on Kapi‘olani Boulevard. No Jaucas sand deposits were identified in any of the 30 test trenches. The natural land surface, prior to historic/modern fill episodes, was either a sandy clay or a highly organically enriched peat layer. The natural pre-fill land surface had been completely removed by prior construction-related

-6847) was identified, consisting of a wooden box placed in a pit cut down into the sandy clay former land surface. The box contained a mix of historic artifacts including, among other things, printed material, wooden chopsticks, a pig bone, and a horse brush. It was tentatively dated to the late nineteenth or early twentieth century.

No subsurface testing was conducted in “Project Area 2” within the current Ala Moana Center parking structure based on documentary evidence indicating it was completely disturbed during the construction of that portion of the Ala Moana Center parking structure, and the assumed unlikeliness that any intact cultural deposits were present (Hammatt 2006a).

In 2006, CSH completed an archaeological literature review and field inspection for a 1391 Kapi‘olani Boulevard project. The study discusses the possibility of intact pre-Contact and early post-Contact cultural deposits associated with traditional Hawaiian habitation, worksites, and recreation activities. The report also highlights the high probability of encountering human burials within sand deposits (Hammatt 2006a).

Archaeological monitoring of both project areas was conducted by CSH intermittently between March 2006 and March 2007 (Hazlett et al. 2008). No historic properties were identified during the project. The stratigraphy of “Project Area 1” generally consisted of imported construction fill, overlying a discontinuous buried A horizon (former land surface) consisting of naturally deposited sandy loam atop varying layers of naturally deposited loams and clays indicative of the marsh environment that preceded land reclamation and subsequent development of the area. The stratigraphy of “Project Area 2” consisted of varying layers of imported fill that extended to an undetermined depth below the water table (the water table was at approximately 75 to 90 cm below the existing ground surface). The monitoring results indicated “Project Area 2” was previously excavated to below the water table and then subsequently filled in. The findings supported the background research and AIS findings (Hammatt 2006a).

3.3.9 Monahan 2006

Scientific Consultant Services, Inc. (Monahan, 2006) reported on archival and field research on the archaeology and history of an approximately 7.0-acre parcel at the Shriners Hospital. A total of 13 stratigraphic trenches yielded no finds of any historic and/or cultural significance. No human remains or, in fact, bones of any kind, were identified. This appears to have been basically an earlier draft of the Drennan 2007 study.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 74

3.3.10 Drennan 2007

Scientific Consultant Services Inc. (Drennan 2007) conducted an AIS of two parcels measuring approximately 4,930 sq m ide of Ke‘eaumoku Street, TMKs: [1] 2-4-005:026 and 027. Twenty backhoe trenches collectively totaling 462.3 m in length were excavated to an average depth of 1.89 m below ground surface. historic property was identified, SIHP # -6909, comprised of 19 subsurface features which were historical fill deposits, building foundations, and trash and midden deposits representative of the late 1800s in Honolulu.

3.3.11 Runyon and 2007

In 2007, CSH monitored the installation of subsurface electrical conduits that would be used in

documented that the project area’s subsurface deposits were heavily disturbed by roadway construction and utility installation, which included extensive earthmoving activity and importation of fill sediments. No archaeological cultural deposits were identified due to the shallowness of the majority of the excavated conduit trenches and heavy fill deposits. The project excavations exposed small amounts of natural sediments. little stratigraphy that predated the modern fill layers was exposed.

3.3.12 McCurdy and 2008

In 2008, CSH completed archaeological monitoring of construction activities at the Makaloa Substation. No historic properties were identified; however, pond/wetland deposits were encountered and tested. Pollen analysis documented abundant Cyperaceae (sedge) pollen and Saccharum-type (sugarcane) pollen. sp. (kiawe) pollen found within the wetland samples suggest the wetlands did see intrusion of invasive species in the historic era. (sweet potato) was found in an isolated sample, suggesting some small scale agriculture may have been conducted in this area (McCurdy and Hammatt 2008).

3.3.13 Tome and Spear 2008

Scientific Consultant Services, Inc. (Tome and Spear 2008) conducted an AIS (reported as an

and Young streets (TMKs: [1] 2-4-006:017 and 018). Nine stratigraphic trenches of various lengths and depths were placed at various points throughout the property to provide sampling of subsurface contexts Seven historic-type artifacts (six ceramic sherds and one glass sherd) were recovered from trench backfill piles. No archaeological sites were identified.

3.3.14 al. 2010

with limited subsurface testing for a proposed Safeway/Schuman Carriage property project, TMKs: [1] 2-4-011:008, 009, 010, and 011. Five backhoe test trenches (Trenches 1–5) were excavated, documented, and sampled. Research of historic documents and previous archaeological studies indicated there is a low potential for intact cultural deposits in the project area, including pre- Contact deposits, historic deposits, and possibly pre- and post-Contact burials.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 75

3.3.15 Altizer et al. 2011

for the Kapi‘olani Area Revised Sewer System project in 13 segments around the Kaka‘ako,

deposit (SIHP # -6636) was encountered in Sewer Line G, located off Pensacola Street between Ho‘ola‘i and Kamaile streets. The wetland deposit is described as a pre-Contact to early twentieth century land surface below dredged fill materials from the Kewalo and Ala Wai Canal land reclamation projects. The location of the deposit is consistent with an unnamed pond and former rice fields present on historic maps.

3.3.16 Sholin and Dye 2012

In 2012, T.S. Dye & Colleagues competed an AIS of the proposed assisted living facility located the negative results were

reported as an archaeological assessment. Additionally Sholin and Dye (2012) observed there have been extensive alterations to the land during modern times. The subsurface deposits lacked cultural deposits and material, and deposits consisted mainly of fill material.

3.3.17 Burke and 2012

In 2011, CSH conducted an AIS of a 1.43-acre parcel located at 1391 Kapi‘olani Boulevard for which CSH had previously carried out a literature review study (Hammatt 2006b). A layer of historic trash, designated as SIHP # -7193, was identified throughout the northern and eastern portions of the project area (Burke and Hammatt 2012). The trash layer corresponds to land reclamation activities during the early to mid-twentieth century, similar to deposits identified in the surrounding area (e.g., see et al. 2003; et al. 2004; et al. 2006; Thurman et al. 2009; and Tulchin and Hammatt 2005). Artifacts collected range in date from the 1930s to the 1950s.

3.3.18 Medina and 2012

CSH (Medina, and Hammatt 2012) conducted archaeological monitoring for a Safeway, Inc. development project, TMKs: [1] 2-4-identified (SHIP # -7212), a post-Contact trash pit containing refuse dating from 1880 to 1920.

3.3.19 2013

In 2013, CSH performed AIS testing within numerous locations between Middle Street and Ala Moana Center (Hammatt 2013). Testing revealed multiple sites, three of which were identified near the current project area—SIHP # -6636 (former wetland), SIHP # -7193 (subsurface historic trash deposit), and SIHP # -7430 (subsurface privy remnant). Kewalo wetland sediments were

the Honolulu High Capacity Transit Corridor project (T-186 through T-193, T-195, T-196, T-198 through T-200, T-202, T-202A, T-203, T-205, T-207, T-208, T-210 through T-212, T-214, T-219, and T-220). In general, the wetland sediments were documented as variations of brown and gray silty clays, sandy clays, clay loams, and, similar to the current AIS, black silt loam peat layers.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 76

3.3.20 Burke et al. 2013

In 2012, CSH completed an AIS for the Gardens Assisted Living Community project. Wetland sediment was identified and designated as SIHP # -7416. Two samples from different

sample returned a calibrated date range of AD 1028-1185 (95.4% probability), while the other sample returned calibrated date ranges of AD 1298-1370 (68.0% probability) and AD 1380-1413 (27.4% probability). The date

area by pre-Contact Hawaiians. A single feature—SIHP # -7416 Feature 1 (post mold)—was identified within the wetland sediments. The presence of this post mold indicates cultural activity within the wetland during pre-Contact times, possibly associated with habitation.

3.3.21 et al. 2013

CSH completed an AIS of the Walgreens Kapi‘olani Redevelopment project area (Hunkin et al. 2013). Two historic properties were identified during AIS test excavations: a previously identified remnant wetland deposit (SIHP # -6636), and newly identified remnant historic concrete structures (SIHP # -7431). Test excavations indicated relatively consistent stratigraphy throughout the project area. Silty clay sediments indicative of a wetland deposit (SIHP # -6636) were documented in each of the trenches. In general, the wetland sediment contained bluish to greenish gray sandy clay variations. Evidence of A horizon soil formation processes was observed in some test excavations, characterized by darker, organically enriched clays that contained decomposing rootlets and reed vegetation remnants. Two diagnostic historic glass bottle artifacts were recovered from the wetland sediment; one from Trench 1 and one from Trench 4.

3.3.22 2013

Sewer Rehabilitation project located along Philip Street. No evidence of pre- and/or early post-Contact land use (pre-1850) or intact deposits related to later nineteenth century land use were present. Also, no burials were encountered during monitoring. The majority of the exposed sediments were fill soils indicating the natural deposits had been altered or displaced. The sediments observed during this project were typical of the downtown Honolulu area which include a concrete or asphalt surface overlying fill soils overlaying clay loam alluvium, black volcanic cinder (Tantalus/Sugarloaf cinder), and Pleistocene age coral reef.

3.3.23 Morriss et al. 2013

In 2012, CSH conducted an AIS for the Ala Moana Center ‘Ewa Mall Expansion project (Morriss et al. 2013). The 15.7-acre project included the excavation of 26 test trenches within the western portion of Ala Moana Center. previously identified site, SIHP # -6636 (Kewalo wetland sediments), was documented.

Possible salt pan signatures were observed in nine trenches (Trenches 3, 6, 8, 9, 13, 16, 18, 19, and 23) characterized by greenish-gray clays overlying natural wetland sediment. Seven samples of clay associated with potential salt pans and of natural wetland sediments were analyzed by the Paleo Research Institute for pollen, phytolith, and resistivity. Five samples were analyzed for pollen and phytoliths to determine their correlation with the nearby wetland surface. Resistivity testing was completed on six samples to identify differences among potential salt pan lining clay,


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 77

marsh, and hydraulic fill deposits. The results of the resistivity testing on the potential salt pan lining clay sediments were suggestive but inconclusive. It was determined that additional future testing of the deposits and more comparative analysis of potential salt pan lining clay and wetland deposit datasets are needed to characterize salt pan deposits in this area (Morriss et al. 2013).

3.3.24 Pammer and McDermott 2014

In 2014, CSH completed an AIS for the Park Lane project within the Ala Moana Center project area. The AIS further documented a former wetland deposit (SIHP # -6636) and newly identified and documented a historic trash deposit, SIHP # -7696 (Pammer and McDermott 2014).

3.3.25 Enanoria et al. 2015

Between 2013 and 2014, CSH conducted archaeological monitoring for the Walgreens Kapi‘olani Redevelopment project. the two previously identified historic properties, only SIHP # -6636, buried wetland sediment associated with Kewalo wetlands, was encountered and further documented. SIHP # -7431, buried structural remnants, was not encountered during monitoring. Also newly identified and documented was SIHP # -7757, a historic trash layer consisting of a secondary deposit of fill containing numerous glass bottles associated with post-Contact (early to mid-twentieth century) commercial and residential activity. The general observed stratigraphic sequence consisted predominantly of various imported fill deposits associated with modern urban development (i.e., construction of roads and installation of utilities), overlying the Kewalo wetlands (SIHP # -6636).

3.3.26 Manirath and Shideler 2016

CSH (Manirath and Shideler 2016) excavated nine test trenches during an AIS, exposing several layers of fill overlying a wetland deposit indicative of the former wetland plain of Honolulu. Native Hawaiians used the Honolulu plain for the cultivation of fishponds and subsistence crops such as taro and banana, and during the post-Contact period for salt production and rice cultivation. These continuous cultural activities were identified during nearby archaeological investigations as berms, saltpans, lo‘i, pond banks, and ‘auwai (water channel) levee remnants and collectively grouped under one historic property: SIHP # -6636. The wetland deposit in the current project area is considered an expansion of SIHP # -6636. The site deposit is characterized in the current project area as one or more wetland soil layers with freshwater gastropods. A possible rock retaining wall (SIHP # -6366, Feature 2) was also identified in association with the wetland deposit.

-filling of the wetland plain followed by subsequent development of the raised, dry plain for industrial warehouses, residential properties, and commercial buildings. Three artifacts associated with post-Contact use of the project area included a knob (Acc. # 1), a shell button (Acc. # 2) and a bottle base fragment (Acc. # 3). The knob was most likely made after 1846, and the shell button was in use between the late eighteenth to early nineteenth centuries. The bottle base fragment was made in 1942.

SIHP # -6636 is evaluated as significant under Criterion d (have yielded, or is likely to yield information important for research on prehistory or history) pursuant to HAR §13-284-6. This historic property provides the potential to further understand the temporal and spatial history of agricultural and aquacultural practices utilized in this area and to potentially identify the boundaries of the Kewalo wetlands.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 78

3.3.27 The Makaloa-Sheridan Sam’s Club/Wal-Mart Project

The Sam’s Club/Wal-Mart Project area is located immediately northwest of the present project area across Ke‘eaumoku Street. This probably has been one of the two most publicized projects in the history of archaeology in Hawai‘i. In 1999, SHPD reviewed a request for a conditional use permit (CUP) for a Kapiolani Akahi Continuing Care Retirement Community Building at the corner of Sheridan and Makaloa streets (Hibbard 1999). The SHPD review concluded, “Because no surface remains are known to exist on the parcels (previously cleared and vacant), and because of the low potential for finding subsurface cultural deposits, we believe that this project will have ‘no effect’ on historic properties” (Hibbard 1999).

Aki Sinoto Consulting completed a literature review and field inspection (report titled archaeological assessment) of the proposed Sam’s Club/Wal-Mart project area (TMKs: [1] 2-3- 016:009, 012, and 042) which was prepared for Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (Sinoto 2000). At the time, the study area was a vacant 10.5-acre property bounded by Rycroft Street on the north, Ke‘eaumoku Street on the east, Makaloa Street on the south, and Sheridan Street on the northwest. This study involved on-site surface inspection and an archival literature review and documents search. The field inspection results were reported as “No significant archaeological remains were found within the boundaries of the current project area” (Sinoto 2000:17). It was concluded that the “occurrence of pre-Contact Hawaiian remains is considered to be minimal in the subject area” and that “pre-construction testing is considered to be unfeasible” (Sinoto 2000:17). The study recommended an archaeological monitoring program.

An archaeological monitoring plan was prepared for the proposed Sam’s Club/Wal-Mart project by Aki Sinoto Consulting (Sinoto and Pantaleo 2002). This plan repeated the conclusion that the “occurrence of pre-Contact Hawaiian remains is considered to be minimal in the subject area” (Sinoto and Pantaleo 2002:4).

The formal documentation of the archaeological monitoring (McElroy 2010) was carried out by an archaeologist (Windy McElroy) not associated with the archaeological firm involved in the field work and who was not involved in the actual field project or laboratory work. Her report was produced more than five years after the field work concluded and was “generated entirely from written material provided by the State Historic Preservation Division.”

As documented by McElroy (2010), the archaeological monitoring took place over nearly two years from November 2002 to 2004. analysis was not completed so the total number of individuals may never be known but the number identified was 64. These 64 burials were encountered in six locations designated as Burial Find Spots (BFS 1 through 6). These were grouped into three historic properties:

1. SIHP # -6516 including BFS 1, 3, 4, and 5, near the Makaloa Street/Sheridan Street intersection;

2. SIHP # -6661 including BFS 2, near the northeast end of Sheridan Street; and

3. SIHP # -6662 including BFS 6, near the northeast end of Sheridan Street.

the 64 sets of burials, the position of the remains were determined in 30 cases. these, nine were in a flexed position indicative of a traditional Hawaiian burial (perhaps prior to ca. 1825) and 21 were in an extended position suggestive of a western burial style (likely post-1825). Certain


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 79

osteological characteristics suggested some of the burials were non-Hawaiian or part- Hawaiian. A date of AD 1845 to 1870 for burial-related artifacts and the fact that many of the extended burials appeared to lack coffins led to the belief that some of the burials were “attributed to the small pox epidemic of 1853” (McElroy 2010:24). McElroy (2010) supplies no discussion of what burials were relocated and what burials (if any) were left in place. There is a burial preserve in the west cornerof the property but whether there are preserved-in-place burials is unclear to CSH. The findings are discussed further below.

Background Summary and Predictive Model Documentary evidence suggests the present project area is located in a region less extensively

than the nearby centers of and Honolulu. However, maps and documents produced during the nineteenth century farming, salt making, and wetland agriculture.

properties of both pre- and/or early post-Contact traditional Hawaiian and post-Contact western- related cultural deposits and human burials. Some of these historic properties appear relatively intact despite the years of construction activities that have altered portions of these areas.

3.4.1 Burials

Previous archaeological investigations have documented both pre-Contact and historic-era

found just above the water table and below historic-era fill materials, primarily in sandy deposits.

Human burials discoveries were reported by at least three previous studies (Athens et al. 1994, Smith 1989, and McElroy 2010) in the vicinity of the project area. More than 64 sets of pre-Contact and historic human burials (SIHP #s -6516, -6661, and -6662) were discovered at the Makaloa- Sheridan Sam’s Club/Wal-Mart project 150 m southwest of the project area across Ke‘eaumoku Street (McElroy 2010). Smith documented previously disturbed human bones near Kona Street. A pre-Contact sub-adult burial was documented a block (approximately 0.47 km or 0.3 miles) west of the project area, in the intersection of Pi‘ikoi Street and Kapi‘olani Boulevard (Athens et al. 1994). The stratigraphic context of the burial was associated with a wetlands environment.

The prospect for human burials within the project area is generally regarded as low. The Walmart finds are thought to relate to a different micro-environment of naturally elevated dry land directly associated with Sheridan Street. than the finds in the immediate vicinity of Sheridan Street, there have been relatively few burial finds in this vicinity. The soil profiles recorded in the immediate vicinity appear very unlikely to be associated with burials.

3.4.2 Pre-Contact and Early Post-Contact Agricultural and Deposits

The project area appears to be located in what was once a marshy wetland plain of Honolulu. This area provided ancient Hawaiians with the environment needed for the cultivation of fishponds and manufacture of salt. The features expected from these cultural activities include berms, saltpans, lo‘i, pond banks, and ‘auwai levee remnants. Following the initial years of European contact, westerners engaged in new massive agricultural ventures. Immigrant workers from Asia were brought to Hawai‘i to labor in these new agricultural ventures and as a result, rice also became


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 80

of rice, and the area turned over much of its traditional taro cultivation land to rice production. The same area in the early twentieth century was altered more intensely for land reclamation plans; the resulting dredge and fill projects obliterated what remained of traditional Hawaiian cultivation processes in the wetlands of

The present project area was part of a Little Britain compound (see Figure 9) belonging to an important person in Hawai‘i’s past, General William Miller, at least as early as 1850. The presence of a small hospital at Little Britain, which may have been established during the 1853 smallpox epidemic, suggests a possibly elevated potential for human skeletal remains in the vicinity but the main Little Britain compound was 250 m mauka.

There is some uncertainty introduced by the configuration of the Little Britain property fence (as seen on the 1893 Wall map of Honolulu; see Figure 18) only because generally there is a preference for dry ground for pasturage (and the aforementioned Little Britain hospital). But all in all, the present evidence suggests burial probability is low.

3.4.3 Potential for Other Finds

The fact that Little Britain was a very substantial compound that hosted events drawing as many as 5,000 spectators raises the prospect of subsurface finds such as trash deposits or privies but again the focus of this enterprise was mauka of the project area.

There is a high probability there will be subsurface finds such as a remnant wetland deposit and the remnant historic concrete structures associated with past industrial and commercial land use in the 1950s as well as pre-Contact burials.

Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: WAIKIKI 249 Results of Fieldwork

AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 81

Section 4

archaeologists under the general supervision of Hallett H. Hammatt, Ph.D. (Principle Investigator). Fieldwork consisted of a 100% pedestrian inspection of the AIS project area, consisting of the 3.5-acre project area. Following the pedestrian survey, the historic property identification effort focused on a subsurface testing program where 19 test excavations were excavated, documented, and sampled.

An 1891 map of Little Britain showed the first major development of post-Contact human activity within the project area (see Figure 16). The subsurface testing plan placed test excavationsto target multiple areas of importance including a former ditch (T-5, T-6, and T-16), former servants’ quarters (T-3), former dwellings (T-7 and T-11), and probable wetlands (T-8, T-9, and T-10). The remainder of the test excavations were placed for representative distribution.

The subsurface testing plan originally consisted of 12 subsurface test excavations (T-1 through T-12). The subsurface testing plan was modified per the request of SHPD in a meeting held on19 April 2018 for an additional four test excavations (T-1 through T-16). Due to a previously identified burial find within T-11, an additional three test excavations were completed around the boundaries of T-11 to determine the possibility of any additional burials or burial clusters in the immediate vicinity (T-17 through T-19) (Figure 41). T-17 was abandoned due to the presence of an active sewer line that broke during excavation activity. Immediately west of T-17, avoiding the route of the sewer line, T-17a was excavated in place of T-17.

All test excavations were excavated by a backhoe excavator to sterile material observed between 46 and 240 mbs to a base depth ranging from 182 to 240 mbs. The following paragraphs provide an overview and summary of the subsurface testing results. For detailed information regarding each of the test excavations, please refer to the profiles, stratigraphic descriptions, and photographs that follow this more general summary discussion.

Stratigraphic Summary The general observed stratigraphy from open trenching primarily consists of imported and

locally procured fill deposits (Stratum I) and a naturally occurring silt loam deposit (Strata II/III). Some areas in the central portion of the project area contained a buried A horizon with minimal charcoal flecking (Stratum II). In the southernmost portion of the project area, a culturally modified deposit was observed (Stratum ). These observations are consistent with the USDA soil data for the project area and its vicinity (Foote et al. 1972). All excavations were backfilled after completion of documentation.

Naturally occurring silt loam was encountered throughout the entire project area (T-1 through T-19). This deposit consists contains volcanic cinder that progressively contained a higher concentration near the base of excavation. The silt loam deposit was observed between 46 to 240 cmbs and designated as Stratum II. Sub-strata designations occurred within some test excavations as there were separate deposits. Naturally formed cemented cinder was observed between 85 and 230 mbs within the central portion of the project area within test excavations T-4 through T-6, T-14, T-17a, T-18, and T-19.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 82

Figure 41. Google Earth Aerial Imagery (2013) depicting the locations of test excavations (T-1

through T-19)


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 83

The silt loam material containing volcanic cinder represents the anticipated natural geological composition expected in this area.

identified consisting of the Kewalo wetlands (SIHP # -6636). SIHP # -6636 was identified in one test excavation (T-8) and designated as Stratum According to historic maps and field results, the culturally modified silty clay material is related to wetland deposits likely associated with former agricultural activity (see Figure 6). Stratum I is considered a component of SIHP # -6636.

Four newly identified historic properties were identified including an ‘auwai, a buried road, a charcoal-enriched A horizon, and human skeletal remains. The ‘auwai or ditch remnant is designated as SIHP # -8801. The buried road surface is likely related to a former road dating between 1920 and 1943 is designated as SIHP # -8802. The charcoal enriched A horizon was only identified in T-17a and is designated as SIHP # -8803. The human burial was identified within the southern portion of T-11 and is designated as SIHP # -8804. For a detailed description of SIHP # -6636 through SIHP # -8804 please refer to Section 7 Historic Property Descriptions.

Based on testing, the stratigraphy observed throughout the project area indicates the northern portion of the project area to be relatively undisturbed within the silt loam deposits in comparison to the central and northern portions of the project area. The silt loam deposits were identified at lower depths in the central and southern portions of the project area suggesting a gradual sloping effect. The sloping effect relates to a change in elevation representing a transitional zone from the southern portion of the project area’s edge of the SIHP # -6636 Kewalo wetlands to the northern dryland areas, which was less occupied in pre-Contact and historic times.

The central portion of the project area displayed the most evidence of land use, containing four newly identified historic properties. A buried road, SIHP # -8802, observed between 34 and 108 cmbs was documented through the central portion of the project area within T-4, T-7, T-11, and T-19. According to historic maps and aerials, SIHP # -8802 is related to a former road, Custer Street, which existed between 1920 through the early 1950s (see Figure 22 and Figure 29). Additionally, a documented ‘auwai, SIHP # -8801, was observed within T-6 as shown on historic maps spanning between 1891 through 1936 (see Figure 15 through Figure 17 and Figure 27). An early post-Contact charcoal-enriched A horizon, SIHP # -8803, containing charcoal, faunal bone, and marine shell midden materials was observed in one test excavation, T-17a. SIHP # -8803 is within a former dwelling footprint and in the near vicinity of both SIHP #s -8802 and -8804, human burial remains. SIHP # -8804 was observed below disturbed silt loam deposits within T-11, suggesting an age of likely late pre-Contact to early post-Contact. These historic properties all provide the earliest evidence of post-Contact human activity in the area.

The southern portion of the project area represents a low-lying area containing SIHP # -6636 Kewalo wetlands, observed in T-8. T-8 represents the northern edge of SIHP # -6636. According to background research, historic maps and aerials, the area was utiltized from pre-Contact times through the late 1940s when the area was filled in for development with redeposited silt loam observed throughout the project area (see Figure 10, Figure 23, and Figure 32).

In the northern portion of the project area, the silt loam deposits appear to be mostly sterile. However, the central and southern portions of the project area indicate the areas are more likely to contain cultural material associated with former wetlands and/or post-Contact activity spanning the nineteenth century through the early twentieth century including human burials.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 84

4.1.1 Test Excavation 1 (T-1)

T-1 is located in the northwestern portion of the project area near Liona Street (see Figure 41). T-1 was placed in this area for general testing purposes. According to historic maps the area was relatively undeveloped until the early 1900s (see Figure 20) with multiple phases of dwellings in the area until the late 1950s as it transitioned to the present-day parking lot area (see Figure 35). T-1 is oriented north-south and measures 6.7 m long by 0.7 m wide. The base of excavation was determined by the presence of sterile material at 1.82 mbs.

The stratigraphy observed within T-1 consists of asphalt (Stratum Ia), extremely gravelly sandy loam fill (Strata Ib and Ic), gravelly silty clay loam fill (Stratum Id), overlying a naturally occurring gravelly silt loam (Stratum II) (Figure 42, Figure 43, and Table 3).

Strata Ia through Ic are a series of imported fill deposits, related to the construction of the existing parking lot area in the late 1950s. Stratum Id is a disturbed natural deposit showing evidence of the initial stages of historical development within this portion of the project area. According to historic maps, Stratum Id is likely related to the former dwellings in the area between the early to mid-twentieth century (see Figure 20, Figure 24, and Figure 31). At 30 cmbs the central portion of T-1 contained numerous glass bottles with “JAPAN” inscribed at their base aligned upside down in an F-shaped arrangement along the west sidewall (Figure 44). It is unknown whether these bottles were intentionally placed, but there was no significant cultural material identified above or below this arrangement. Stratum Id also contained historic artifacts and faunal material ranging from 30 to 40 cmbs including cow and bird bone fragments (Acc. # 145), glass bottles and fragments, ceramic sherds, metal nails, and metal pieces (Acc. # 21–25, 72–83).

Stratum II is a naturally occurring gravelly silt loam deposit consistent with the USDA soil data, Kawaihapai clay loam (KIA) for the project area and its vicinity (Foote et al. 1972). The lower portion of Stratum II contains a higher concentration of volcanic cinder.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 85

Figure 42. T-1 west sidewall, view to west

Figure 43. T-1 west sidewall profile


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 86

Table 3. T-1 stratigraphic description

Stratum Depth (cmbs)

Description

Ia 0–12 Asphalt Ib 12–14 Fill; 5YR 5/8, yellowish red; extremely gravelly sandy loam; weak, fine,

granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; marine origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary; imported crushed coral base course

Ic 14–20 Fill; 5YR 8/1, white; extremely gravelly sandy loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; marine origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary; imported crushed coral base course

Id 19–67 Fill; 10YR 2/2, very dark brown; gravelly silty clay loam; moderate, medium, granular structure; moist, firm consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; clear, smooth lower boundary

II 46–182

Natural; 10YR 3/3, dark brown; gravelly silt loam; moderate, very fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; lower boundary not visible

Figure 44. T-1 plan view showing Japanese bottles


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 87


T-2 is in the northeastern portion of the project area near Liona Street (see Figure 41). T-2 was placed in this area for general testing purposes and located just west of a former ditch that ran through the project area (see Figure 16). According to historic maps and aerial photographs, the area was relatively undeveloped until the early 1900s (see Figure 24) with multiple phases of dwellings in the near vicinity of the area until the late 1950s as it transitioned to the present-day parking lot area (see Figure 35). T-2 is oriented north-south and measures 6.10 m long by 0.75 m wide. The base of excavation was determined by the presence of sterile material at 2.30 mbs.

The stratigraphy observed within T-2 consists of concrete (Stratum Ia), extremely gravelly silt loam fill (Stratum Ib), gravelly sandy clay loam fill (Stratum Ic), very gravelly sandy loam fill (Stratum Id), gravelly clay loam fill (Stratum Ie), very cobbly sandy clay (Stratum If), very cobbly silt loam (Stratum Ig), extremely gravelly loamy sand fill (Stratum Ih), gravelly sandy clay loam fill (Stratum Ii), overlying a naturally occuring silt loam (Stratum II) (Figure 45, Figure 46, and Table 4).

Strata Ia through Ih are a series of imported fill deposits related to the construction of the existing parking lot area in the late 1950s, and likely represent activity related to former dwellings in the area between the early to mid-twentieth century (see Figure 20, Figure 24, and Figure 31). Stratum Ii is a disturbed natural deposit showing evidence of the initial stages of historical development within this portion of the project area. Stratum If and Ii contained historic artifacts and faunal material ranging from 44 to 166 cmbs. Samples collected from Stratum If included a ceramic fragment (Acc. # 5). Samples collected from Stratum Ii included glass bottles and fragments, ceramic sherds, a porcelain button, and a glass marble (Acc. #s 40–52).

Stratum II is a naturally occurring gravelly silt loam deposit consistent with the USDA soil data, Kawaihapai clay loam (KIA) for the project area and its vicinity (Foote et al. 1972). The lower portion of Stratum II contains a higher concentration of volcanic cinder.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 88

Figure 45. T-2 west sidewall, view to northwest



AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 89



Description

Ia 0–10 Concrete Ib 8–15 Fill; 2.5Y 6/1, gray; extremely gravelly silt loam; weak, fine, crumb

structure; moist, loose consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; abrupt, smooth lower boundary; imported basalt base course

Ic 12–25 Fill; 7.5YR 2.5/2, very dark brown; gravelly sandy clay loam; weak, very fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

Id 22–33 Fill; 7.5YR 5/4, brown; very gravelly sandy loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, discontinuous lower boundary

Ie 22–51 Fill; 2.5YR 3/3, dark reddish brown; gravelly clay loam; moderate, fine, granular structure; moist, firm consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; few, fine roots; abrupt, smooth lower boundary

If 45–60 Fill; 10YR 7/4, very pale brown; very cobbly sandy clay; moderate, medium, granular structure; moist, firm consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; mixed origin; no roots observed; abrupt, smooth lower boundary

Ig 50–70 Fill; 10YR 5/2, grayish brown; very cobbly silt loam; moderate, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; abrupt, broken lower boundary

Ih 59–67 Fill; 2.5Y 7/4, pale yellow; extremely gravelly loamy sand; structureless (single-grain); moist, loose consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; mixed origin; no roots observed; abrupt, discontinuous lower boundary

Ii 60–166 Fill; 10YR 2/2, very dark brown; gravelly sandy clay loam; moderate, very fine, granular structure; moist, firm consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; few, fine roots; diffuse, smooth lower boundary

II 160–230

Natural; 7.5YR 2.5/2, very dark brown; silt loam; weak, very fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; lower boundary not visible


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 90


T-3 is in the northeastern portion of the project area within parking stalls fronting a recently demolished building (see Figure 41). T-3 was placed in this area to target the former servants’ quarters from Little Britain (see Figure 16). According to historic maps and aerial photographs, the area was relatively undeveloped after Little Britain until the early 1900s (see Figure 24) with multiple phases of dwellings in the near vicinity of the area until the late 1950s as it transitioned to the present-day parking lot area (see Figure 35). T-3 is oriented north-south and measures 6.40 m long by 0.80 m wide. The base of excavation was determined by the presence of sterile material at 2.40 mbs.

The stratigraphy observed within T-3 consists of concrete (Stratum Ia), very gravelly clay loam fill (Stratum Ib), gravelly sandy loam fill (Stratum Ic), very gravelly sand fill (Stratum Id), very gravelly sandy clay loam fill (Stratum Ie), very gravelly clay loam fill (Stratum If), gravelly silty clay loam fill (Stratum Ig), very gravelly silty clay loam fill (Stratum Ih), overlying a silty clay loam A horizon (Stratum IIa), and naturally occuring silt loam (Stratum IIb).

Strata Ia through If are a series of imported fill deposits. Strata Ia through Ie are related to the construction of the existing parking lot area in the late 1950s. Strata If and Ig likely represent activity related to the former dwellings in the area between the early to mid-twentieth century (see Figure 20, Figure 24, and Figure 31). Stratum Ig contained historic artifacts ranging from 45 to 85 cmbs. Collected historic artifacts from Stratum Ig included glass bottles and fragments, ceramic sherds, and metal nails (Acc. #s 13–20, 37–39). Stratum Ih consists of an abandoned utility pit in the southern portion of T-3.

Stratum IIa is a buried A horizon ranging from 65 to 108 cmbs. The upper portion of Stratum IIa contained less than 15% of charcoal in which one sample was collected between 65 to 70 cmbs. No additional cultural materials were observed.

Stratum IIb is a naturally occurring gravelly silt loam deposit consistent with the USDA soil data, Kawaihapai clay loam (KIA) for the project area and its vicinity (Foote et al. 1972). The lower portion of Stratum IIb contains a higher concentration of volcanic cinder.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 91

Figure 47. T-3 west sidewall, view to west



AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 92



Description

Ia 0–14 Concrete Ib 7–25 Fill; 10YR 3/2, very dark grayish brown; very gravelly clay loam; weak,

fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary; imported gravel base course

Ic 14–25 Fill; 7.5YR 3/3, dark brown; gravelly sandy loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, discontinuous lower boundary

Id 18–33 Fill; 10YR 8/1, white; very gravelly sand; structureless (single-grain); moist, loose consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; marine origin; no roots observed; abrupt, discontinuous lower boundary

Ie 13–30 Fill; 5YR 3/4, dark reddish brown; very gravelly sandy clay loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, discontinuous lower boundary

If 22–57 Fill; 5YR 4/4, reddish brown; very gravelly clay loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; few, fine to medium roots; clear, smooth lower boundary

Ig 45–85 Fill; 7.5YR 3/3, dark brown; gravelly silty clay loam; moderate, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; few, fine to medium roots; clear, smooth lower boundary

Ih 80–130 Fill; 10YR 2/2, very dark brown; very gravelly silty clay loam; moderate, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; few, fine roots observed; broken, discontinuous lower boundary, utility pit

IIa 65–108 A horizon; 10YR 2/2, very dark brown; silty clay loam; moderate, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; few, medium to coarse roots; diffuse, smooth lower boundary

IIb 84–240

Natural; 10YR 3/3, dark brown; silt loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; few, coarse roots; lower boundary not visible


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 93


T-4 is located in the eastern portion of the project area within parking stalls alongside Salon Glitter (see Figure 41). T-4 was placed in this area for general testing purposes. According to historic maps and aerial photographs, the area was relatively undeveloped after Little Britain until the early 1900s (see Figure 24) with multiple phases of dwellings in the near vicinity of the area until the late 1950s as it transitioned to the present-day parking lot area (see Figure 35). T-4 is oriented east-west and measures 6.0 m long by 0.70 m wide. The base of excavation was determined by the presence of sterile material at 2.06 mbs.

The stratigraphy observed within T-4 consists of concrete (Stratum Ia), extremely gravelly sandy loam fill (Stratum Ib), gravelly silty clay loam fill (Stratum Ic), a buried asphalt surface (Stratum Id), extremely gravelly sandy loam fill (Stratum Ie), gravelly silty clay fill (Stratum If), coarse sand fill (Stratum Ig), overlying a silty clay loam A horizon (Stratum IIa), a naturally deposited silt loam (Stratum IIb), and a naturally occuring very gravelly sandy loam (Stratum III) (Figure 49, Figure 50, and Table 6).

Strata Ia through Id are a series of imported fill deposits. Strata Ia through Ic are related to the construction of the existing parking lot area in the late 1950s.

Stratum Id is a buried asphalt surface prior to the existing parking lot built in the 1950s. Stratum Id was identified between 34 and 45 cmbs with associated discontinuous crushed coral base lenses (Stratum Ie). According to historic maps and aerials Stratum Id is related to a former road, Custer Street, which existed between 1920 through the early 1950s (see Figure 22 and Figure 29). Stratum Id is considered a component of SIHP # -8802. For additional information please refer to Section 7 Historic Property Descriptions.

Stratum Ie likely represents activity related to former dwellings in the area between the early to mid-twentieth century (see Figure 20, Figure 24, and Figure 31). Stratum Ie contained historic artifacts and faunal material ranging from 44 to 166 cmbs. A cat burial was observed in the western portion of T-4 within an abandoned utility pit. The utility pit ranged from Stratum Ie at approximately 80 cmbs and extended to Stratum IIb at 110 cmbs. Samples collected from Stratum Ie include glass bottles and fragments, and metal nails (Acc. #s 125–130).

Strata IIa and IIb represent a naturally occurring gravelly silt loam deposit consistent with the USDA soil data, Kawaihapai clay loam (KIA) for the project area and its vicinity (Foote et al. 1972). Stratum IIb contains a higher concentration of volcanic cinder.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 94

Figure 49. T-4 north sidewall, view to north

Figure 50. T-4 north sidewall profile


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 95



Description

Ia 0–26 Concrete Ib 20–31 Fill; 10YR 7/3, very pale brown; extremely gravelly sandy loam;

weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; marine origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary; imported crushed coral base course

Ic 25–37 Fill; 5YR 3/3, dark reddish brown; gravelly silty clay loam; moderate, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

Id SIHP # -8802

34–45 Asphalt

Ie 37–46 Fill; 5YR 8/1, white; extremely gravelly sandy loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; marine origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary; imported crushed coral base course

If 37–100

Fill; 10YR 3/3, dark brown; gravelly silty clay; moderate, medium, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; mixed origin; few, fine roots; clear, smooth lower boundary, utility pit observed on the west portion of T-4

Ig 65–90 Fill; 10YR 2/1, black; coarse sand; structureless (single-grain); moist, loose consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, discontinuous lower boundary; imported volcanic cinder

IIa 75–104

A horizon; 10YR 3/2, very dark grayish brown; gravelly silty clay loam; weak, fine, blocky structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; medium roots common; diffuse, smooth lower boundary

IIb 83–185

Natural; 10YR 3/3, dark brown; silt loam; moderate, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, wavy lower boundary

IIc 185–206

Natural; 10YR 3/6, dark yellowish brown; very gravelly sandy loam; moderate, medium, granular structure; moist, firm consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; lower boundary not visible


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 96


T-5 is located in the central portion of the project area within parking stalls fronting the 88 Palpal Supermarket and restaurant Michinoku (see Figure 41). T-5 was placed in this area to target a former bridge area along the ditch route observed in the 1891 Monsarrat map of Little Britain (see Figure 16 and Figure 41). According to historic maps and aerial photographs, the area was relatively undeveloped after Little Britain until the early 1900s (see Figure 24) with multiple phases of dwellings in the near vicinity of the area until the late 1950s as it transitioned to the present-day parking lot area (see Figure 35). T-5 is oriented east-west and measures 7.0 m long by 0.65 m wide. The base of excavation was determined by the presence of sterile material at 2.02 mbs.

The stratigraphy observed within T-5 consists of asphalt (Stratum Ia), extremely gravelly sandy loam fill (Stratum Ib), gravelly sandy loam fill (Stratum Ic), silty clay fill (Stratum Id), gravelly sand fill (Stratum Ie), silty clay fill (Stratum If), and a gravelly sandy clay loam (Stratum Ig), overlying a naturally deposited silt loam (Stratum IIa), and a naturally occuring sandy loam (Stratum IIb).

Strata Ia through Ie are a series of imported fill deposits related to the construction of the existing parking lot area in the late 1950s. Strata If through Ig likely represent activity related to former dwellings in the area between the early to mid-twentieth century (see Figure 20, Figure 24, and Figure 31). Stratum Id contained historic artifacts ranging from 27 to 55 cmbs. Collected samples from Stratum Id include glass bottles and fragments, ceramic sherds, ceramic marble, and a bone button (Acc. #s 26–34, and 131). Three abandoned utility pipes were observed within Strata Ie and If.

Stratum Ig is a disturbed natural deposit showing evidence of the initial stages of historical development within this portion of the project area. A cat burial was observed in the western portion of T-5 overlying a concrete slab within Stratum Ig. The concrete slab was observed at approximately 80 cmbs and measured 40 cm long, 20 cm thick, and extended into the north and south walls for an unknown length (Figure 52).

Strata IIa and IIb represent a naturally occurring gravelly silt loam and sandy loam deposit consistent with the USDA soil data, Kawaihapai clay loam (KIA) for the project area and its vicinity (Foote et al. 1972). Stratum IIb contains a higher concentration of volcanic cinder.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 97

Figure 51. T-5 north sidewall, view to northwest

Figure 52. Close-up of concrete slab on the northwestern portion of T-5


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 98



AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 99



Description

Ia 0–10 Asphalt Ib 10–19 Fill; 10YR 8/2, very pale brown; extremely gravelly sandy loam; weak,

fine, granular structure; moist, loose consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; marine origin; no roots observed; abrupt, smooth lower boundary; imported crushed coral fill

Ic 17–30 Fill; 10YR 3/3, very dark brown; gravelly sandy loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; mixed origin; no roots observed; abrupt, smooth lower boundary

Id 27–55 Fill; 5YR 3/3, dark reddish brown; silty clay; weak, fine, blocky structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; abrupt, smooth lower boundary

Ie 33–54 Fill; 10YR 8/4, very pale brown; gravelly sand; structureless (single-grain); moist, loose consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; marine origin; no roots observed; abrupt, discontinuous lower boundary; imported crushed coral fill

If 43–67 Fill; 10YR 2/1, black; silty clay; weak, fine, blocky structure; moist, firm consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

Ig 55–100 Fill; 10YR 2/2, very dark brown; gravelly sandy clay loam; moderate, very fine, granular structure; moist, firm consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; few, fine roots; diffuse, smooth lower boundary; contains concrete slab, cat burial, and red brick

IIa 53–187 Natural; 10YR 3/2, very dark grayish brown; silt loam; moderate, fine, blocky structure; moist, firm consistence; no cementation; plastic; mixed origin; no roots observed; abrupt, smooth lower boundary

IIb 170–202

Natural; 10YR 2/2, very dark brown; sandy loam; weak, fine, granular structure; dry. loose consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; lower boundary not visible


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 100


T-6 is located in the southwestern portion of the project area within parking stalls on the south side of Sam’s Club Discount Store (see Figure 41). T-6 was placed in this area to target a former ditch observed in the 1891 Monsarrat map of Little Britain (see Figure 16). According to historic maps and aerial photographs, the area was relatively undeveloped after Little Britain until the early 1900s (see Figure 24) with multiple phases of dwellings in the near vicinity of the area until the late 1950s as it transitioned to the present-day parking lot area (see Figure 35). T-6 is oriented east-west and measures 6.25 m long by 0.72 m wide. The base of excavation was determined by the presence of sterile material at 1.95 mbs.

The stratigraphy observed within T-6 consists of asphalt (Stratum Ia), very gravelly sand fill (Stratum Ib), gravelly sandy clay loam fill (Stratum Ic), clay fill (Stratum Id), gravelly sandy clay loam fill (Stratum Ie), gravelly loam fill (Stratum If), gravelly loam fill (Stratum Ig), overlying a silty clay loam ‘auwai, a naturally deposited gravelly silt loam (Stratum IIa), naturally deposited gravelly sandy loam (Stratum IIb), and a naturally occuring sandy loam (Stratum III) (Figure 54, Figure 55, Figure 56, and Table 6).

Strata Ia through If are a series of imported fill deposits, related to the construction of the existing parking lot area in the late 1950s, and activity related to former dwellings in the area between the early to mid-twentieth century (see Figure 20, Figure 24, and Figure 31). mother of pearl button was collected from Stratum Ie (Acc. # 132).

Stratum Ig is a disturbed natural deposit showing evidence of the initial stages of historical development within this portion of the project area. Stratum Ig contained demolition debris including concrete and red brick, and historic artifacts ranging from 42 to 132 cmbs. Samples collected from Stratum Ig include glass bottles and fragments, ceramic sherds, and metal pieces (Acc. #s 104–114) that roughly date between late nineteenth to mid-twentieth century. Additionally, a utility pipe was observed at approximately 115 cmbs within Stratum Ig. The utility pipe extends into the north and south walls for an unknown length. As a safety precaution, the area beneath the utility pipe was left unexcavated.

The western portion of T-6 contained a silty clay loam ‘auwai originating from the base of Stratum Ig that extends into the upper portion of Stratum IIc. The ditch remnant was observed in both the north and south walls for an unknown length, measuring approximately 95 cm wide and extended from 145 to 173 cmbs. The ‘auwai is considered a component of SIHP # -8801. For additional information please refer to Section 7 Historic Property Descriptions.

Strata IIa through IIc represent a naturally occurring gravelly silt loam deposit consistent with the USDA soil data, Kawaihapai clay loam (KIA) for the project area and its vicinity (Foote et al. 1972). Strata IIb and IIc contains a higher concentration of volcanic cinder.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 101


Figure 55. T-6 north sidewall with SIHP # -8801, view to northwest


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 102



AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 103



Description

Ia 0–13 Asphalt Ib 10–25 Fill; 10YR 6/6, brownish yellow; very gravelly sand; structureless granular

structure (single-grain); moist, loose consistence; non-plastic, no cementation; no roots observed; abrupt, smooth lower boundary; marine origin; abrupt, smooth lower boundary; imported crushed coral base course

Ic 16–29 Fill; 5YR 2.5/1, black, gravelly sandy clay loam, weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; slightly plastic; no cementation; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

Id 20–37 Fill; 10YR 3/4, dark yellowish brown, clay, moderate, medium, blocky structure; moist, friable consistence; non-plastic; no cementation; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

Ie 22–48 Fill; 10YR 3/2, very dark grayish brown, gravelly sandy clay loam, weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; plastic; no cementation; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary, a darker gray silty clay lens is in this stratum (10YR 2/1, black)

If 34–63 Fill; 10YR 2/2, very dark brown, gravelly loam, weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; slightly plastic; no cementation; terrigenous origin; diffuse, no roots observed; discontinuous lower boundary, demo fill, metal, glass, ceramics, pipes

Ig 42–132 Fill; 10YR 3/3, very dark brown; gravelly loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; non-plastic; no cementation; terrigenous; diffuse, few medim roots observed, discontinuous lower boundary; demo layer, cinder mixed in sediment

SIHP # -8801

145–173 SIHP # -8801; 10YR 3/2, very dark grayish brown; silty clay loam; weak, medium, granular structure; friable consistence; slightly plastic; no cementation; terrigenous origin; clear, discontinuous lower boundary

IIa 132–154 Natural; 10YR 3/2, very dark grayish brown; gravelly silt loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; non-plastic; no cementation; terrigenous; no roots observed; diffuse, smooth lower boundary

IIb 150–173 Natural; 10YR 3/2, very dark grayish brown; gravelly sandy loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; non-plastic; no cementation; terrigenous; few fine roots; diffuse, smooth lower boundary

IIc 160–195

Natural; 10YR 2/2, very dark brown; sandy loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; non-plastic; strong cementation; terrigenous; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 104


T-7 is located in the central portion of the project area within parking stalls fronting the Evergreen Adult Day Center (see Figure 41). T-7 was placed in this area to target a former main dwelling observed in the 1891 Monsarrat map of Little Britain (see Figure 16). According to historic maps and aerial photographs, the area was relatively undeveloped after Little Britain until the early 1900s (see Figure 24) with multiple phases of dwellings in the near vicinity of the area until the late 1950s as it transitioned to the present-day parking lot area (see Figure 35). T-7 is oriented east-west and measures 6.0 m long by 0.7 m wide. The base of excavation was determined by the presence of sterile material at 1.75 mbs.

The stratigraphy observed within T-7 consists of asphalt (Stratum Ia), extremely gravelly sandy loam fill (Stratum Ib), silty clay fill (Stratum Ic), very gravelly silty clay fill (Stratum Id), very gravelly silty clay loam fill (Stratum Ie), a buried asphalt surface (Stratum If), very gravelly sandy loam fill (Ig), coarse sand (Stratum Ih), and a very gravelly sandy loam (Stratum Ii), overlying a naturally occuring silt loam (Stratum II) (Figure 57, Figure 58, Figure 59, and Table 9).

The western portion of the west sidewall of T-7 was not visible as it was obliterated from the excavation of T-11. The central portion of T-7 was left unexcavated at approximately 70 cmbs within Stratum Ie due to the presence of a utility pipe and abundance of large basalt boulders. Strata Ia through Ih are a series of imported fill deposits, related to the construction of the existing parking lot area in the 1950s. Strata Ic through Ii likely represent activity related to former dwellings in the area between the early to mid-twentieth century (see Figure 20, Figure 24, and Figure 31). Stratum Ie contained historic artifacts and faunal material ranging from 30 to 103 cmbs.

.

Stratum If is a buried asphalt surface prior to the existing parking lot built in the 1950s. Stratum If was observed between 90 and 108 cmbs on the eastern portion of T-7. According to historic maps and aerials Stratum If is related to a former road, Custer Street, which existed between 1920 through the early 1950s (see Figure 22 and Figure 29). Stratum If is considered a component of SIHP # -8802. For additional information please refer to Section 7 Historic Property Descriptions.

Stratum Ii is a disturbed natural deposit showing evidence of the initial stages of historical development within this portion of the project area. A white tile lens was observed within the western portion of the south sidewall.

Stratum II represents a naturally occurring gravelly silt loam deposit consistent with the USDA soil data, Kawaihapai clay loam (KIA) for the project area and its vicinity (Foote et al. 1972). The lower portion of Stratum II contains a higher concentration of volcanic cinder.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 105

Figure 57. T-7 south sidewall, view to southwest

Figure 58. T-7 south sidewall, view to southwest


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 106

Figure 59. T-7 south sidewall profile


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 107



Description


fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; marine origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary; imported crushed coral base course utilized for the asphalt surface

Ic 25–30 Fill; 10YR 2/2, very dark brown; silty clay; weak, fine, blocky structure; moist, firm consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, broken lower boundary

Id 25–55 Fill; 5YR 3/3, dark reddish brown; very gravelly silty clay; moderate, fine, blocky structure; moist, firm consistence; no cementation; plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

Ie 30–103

Fill; 10YR 3/4, dark yellowish brown; very gravelly silty clay loam; weak, medium, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

If SIHP # -8802

90–108

Asphalt

Ig 78–90 Fill; 10YR 7/3, very pale brown; very gravelly sandy loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; marine origin; no roots observed; clear, broken lower boundary

Ih 82–100

Fill; 10YR 2/1, black; coarse sand; structureless (single-grain); moist, loose consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, discontinuous lower boundary; imported cinder

Ii 93–125

Fill; 10YR 7/3, very pale brown; very gravelly sandy loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; marine origin; no roots observed; clear, broken lower boundary

II 118–210

Natural; 10YR 3/3, dark brown; silt loam; weak, medium, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; lower boundary not visible


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 108


T-8 is located in the southwestern portion of the project area within parking stalls fronting Sorabol restaurant (see Figure 41). T-8 was placed in this area to target possible agricultural deposits (see Figure 16). According to historic maps and aerial photographs, the area was comprised of wetlands as early as 1881 through 1927 (see Figure 11 and Figure 23). Following the in-filling of the wetlands, the area consisted of multiple phases of dwellings until the late 1950s as it transitioned to the present-day parking lot area (see Figure 35). T-8 is oriented in a north-south and measures 6.0 m long by 0.7 m wide. The base of excavation was determined by the presence of sterile material at 2.30 mbs.

The stratigraphy observed within T-8 consists of asphalt (Stratum Ia), extremely gravelly stony loam fill (Stratum Ib), sand fill (Stratum Ic), very gravelly silty clay loam fill (Stratum Id), gravelly silty clay loam fill (Stratum Ie), and silty clay loam fill (Stratum If), overlying a redeposited gravelly silty clay (Stratum II), naturally occurring very gravelly silt loam (Stratum IIIa), naturally occurring sand (Stratum IIIb), naturally occurring gravelly silty clay (Stratum ), and a naturally occuring clay loam (Stratum ) (Figure 60, Figure 61, Figure 62, and Table 10).

The northern portion of T-8 was left unexcavated at approximately 50 cmbs within Stratum Ie due to the presence of a utility pipe. A second utility pipe was observed in Stratum Ie near the central portion of T-8 at 50 cmbs. Due to excavation complications in an effort to avoid both utility pipes, the central portion of T-8 was left unexcavated approximately 80 cmbs.

Strata Ia through Ie are a series of imported fill deposits related to the construction of the existing parking lot area in the late 1950s and likely represent activity related to former dwellings in the area between the early to mid-twentieth century (see Figure 20, Figure 24, and Figure 31). Stratum If is a disturbed natural deposit showing evidence of the initial stages of historical development within this portion of the project area. Stratum Ie contained demolition debris including concrete, red brick, and milled wood, and historic artifacts including glass fragments and metal debris that was observed, but not collected (Figure 63 and Figure 64).

Strata IIIa and IIIb represent a naturally occurring gravelly silt loam deposit consistent with the USDA soil data, Kawaihapai clay loam (KIA) for the project area and its vicinity (Foote et al. 1972). Stratum IIIb contains a higher concentration of volcanic cinder.

evidenced by the presence of gleyed silty clay material observed between 160 and 230 cmbs. Two b from the backdirt pile ranging from

approximately 200 to 230 cmbs. et-screened, and one sediment sample was reserved for pollen analysis. Wet-screening yielded charcoal (< 0.1 g), Melampidae (< 0.1 g), Neritidae (< 0.1 g), crustacean (< 0.1 g), sea urchin (0.1 g), a mouse ulna (< 0.1 g), and at least two species of unidentified seed casings (0.6 g). Based on background research and historic maps, the observed wetland deposits are likely the remnants of late pre-Contact to early post-Contact wetlands related to the Kewalo wetlands, designated as SIHP # -6636. For additional information please refer to Section 7 Historic Property Descriptions.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 109

Figure 60. T-8 east sidewall, view to south

Figure 61. T-8 east wall with close-up of SIHP # -6636, view to east


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 110

Figure 62. T-8 east sidewall profile


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 111



Description

Ia 0–9 Asphalt Ib 7–20 Fill; 5YR 4/3, reddish brown; extremely stony silt loam; weak, fine,

granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; abrupt, smooth lower boundary; imported basalt base course

Ic 16–30 Fill; 10YR 7/4, very pale brown; sand; structureless (single-grain); moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; mixed origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

Id 17–35 Fill; 10YR 3/2, very dark grayish brown; very gravelly silty clay loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; mixed origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

Ie 30–80 Fill; 5YR 3/3, dark reddish brown; gravelly silty clay loam; weak, fine, blocky structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; plastic; mixed origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

If 66–105 Fill; 7.5YR 3/2, dark brown; gravelly silty clay loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

II 100–130 Fill; 10YR 3/2, very dark grayish brown; gravelly silty clay; weak, medium, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; plastic; terrigenous origin; many, fine roots; clear, smooth lower boundary; redeposited former land surface

IIIa 117–150 Fill; 10YR 3/3, dark brown; very gravelly silt loam; weak, very fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; marine origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary; redeposited silt loam

IIIb 138–163 Fill; 10YR 2/2, very dark brown; sand; structureless (single-grain); moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

a SIHP # -6636

160–200 Natural; 10YR 2/2, very dark brown; gravelly silty clay; moderate, medium, blocky structure; moist, firm consistence; no cementation; plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; smooth lower boundary

b SIHP # -6636

200–230

Natural; 10Y 2.5/1, greenish black; clay loam; moderate, medium blocky structure; moist, firm consistence; no cementation; plastic; terrigenous origin; many fine roots observed; abundant snails observed


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 112

Figure 63. Historic artifacts from T-8 observed, but not collected



AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 113


T-9 is located in the southern portion of the project area within a parking lot fronting Yogurstory restaurant (see Figure 41). T-9 was placed in this area to target possible agricultural deposits. According to historic maps and aerial photographs, the area was comprised of wetlands as early as 1881 through 1927 (see Figure 11 and Figure 23). Following the in-filling of the wetlands, the area consisted of multiple phases of dwellings until the late 1950s as it transitioned to the present-day parking lot area (see Figure 35). T-9 is oriented east-west and measures 6.0 m long by 0.7 m wide. The base of excavation was determined by the presence of sterile material at 1.71 mbs.

The stratigraphy observed within T-9 consists of asphalt (Stratum Ia), very gravelly silt loam fill (Stratum Ib), gravelly sandy loam fill (Stratum Ic), very gravelly sandy clay loam fill (Stratum Id), gravelly sandy clay loam fill (Stratum Ie), gravelly sandy clay loam fill (Stratum If), overlying a gravelly silty clay loam A horizon (Stratum IIa), a naturally occurring gravelly silt loam (Stratum IIb), and a naturally occurring gravelly sandy loam (Stratum IIc) (Figure 65, Figure 66, and Table 11).

Strata Ia through If are a series of imported fill deposits, related to the construction of the existing parking lot area in the late 1950s. Strata Id through Ig likely represent activity related to former dwellings in the area between the early to mid-twentieth century (see Figure 20, Figure 24, and Figure 31). A concrete slab was observed at approximately 35 cmbs below Stratum Ib. The concrete slab measured 270 cm long, 10 cm thick, and extended into the north and south walls for an unknown length.

Stratum IIa is a collected from Stratum IIa. No other cultural materials were identified or collected.

Strata IIb and IIc represent a naturally occurring gravelly silt loam deposit consistent with the USDA soil data, Kawaihapai clay loam (KIA) for the project area and its vicinity (Foote et al. 1972). Stratum IIc contains a higher concentration of volcanic cinder.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 114

Figure 65. T-9 northwest sidewall, view to northwest

Figure 66. T-9 northwest sidewall profile


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 115



Description

Ia 0–8 Asphalt Ib 8–24 Fill; 7.5YR 6/2, pinkish gray; very gravelly silt loam; moist, friable

consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary; imported basalt base course utilized for the asphalt surface

Ic 24–30 Fill; 10YR 5/4, yellowish brown; gravelly sandy loam; moderate, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

Id 30–69 Fill; 5YR 3/2, dark reddish brown; very gravelly sandy clay loam; moderate, fine, granular structure; moist, firm consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

Ie 69–85 Fill; 7.5YR 2.5/2, very dark brown; gravelly sandy clay loam; moderate, fine, granular structure; moist, firm consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, irregular lower boundary

If 63–85 Fill; 7.5YR 3/4, dark brown; gravelly sandy clay loam; moderate, fine, granular structure; moist, firm consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; abrupt, broken lower boundary

IIa 78–94 A horizon; 2.5Y 4/1, dark gray; gravelly silty clay loam; moderate, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

IIb 94–144 Natural; 2.5Y 4/4, olive brown; gravelly silt loam; moderate, fine, granular structure; moist, firm consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; diffuse, smooth lower boundary

IIc 141–171

Natural; 2.5Y 4/3, olive brown; gravelly sandy loam; moderate, fine, granular structure; moist, firm consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; lower boundary not visible


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 116


T-10 is located in the southeastern portion of the project area within a parking lot fronting Seoul Karaoke (see Figure 41). T-10 was placed in this area to target possible agricultural deposits. According to historic maps and aerial photographs, the area was comprised of wetlands as early as 1881 through 1927 (see Figure 11 and Figure 23). Following the in-filling of the wetlands, the area consisted of multiple phases of dwellings until the late 1950s as it transitioned to the present-day parking lot area (see Figure 35). T-10 is oriented east-west and measures 6.8 m long by 0.7 m wide. The base of excavation was determined by the presence of sterile material at 2.38 mbs.

The stratigraphy observed within T-10 consists of asphalt (Stratum Ia), extremely gravelly silt loam fill (Stratum Ib), very gravelly sandy clay loam fill (Stratum Ic), clay loam fill (Stratum Id), clay loam fill (Stratum Ie), clay loam fill (Stratum If), overlying a silty clay A horizon (Stratum IIa), a naturally occurring silty clay (Stratum IIb), and naturally occuring sand (Stratum IIc) (Figure 67, Figure 68, and Table 12).

Strata Ia through If are a series of imported fill deposits related to the construction of the existing parking lot area in the late 1950s, and likely represent activity related to former dwellings in the area between the early to mid-twentieth century (see Figure 20, Figure 24, and Figure 31). Stratum If is a disturbed natural deposit showing evidence of the initial stages of historical development within this portion of the project area. Strata If and Ig contained demolition debris including concrete and red brick, and historic artifacts ranging from 42 cm to 132 cmbs. Milled wood fragments (Acc. # 133) were collected from Stratum If.

Strata IIa and IIb represent a naturally occurring gravelly silt loam deposit consistent with the USDA soil data, Kawaihapai clay loam (KIA) for the project area and its vicinity (Foote et al. 1972). Stratum IIb contains a higher concentration of volcanic cinder.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 117

Figure 67. T-10 southwest sidewall, view to southwest

Figure 68. T-10 southwest sidewall profile


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 118



Description

Ia 0–9 Asphalt Ib 9–22 Fill; 7.5YR 4/2, brown; extremely gravelly silt loam; weak, very fine,

granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; abrupt, smooth lower boundary; imported basalt base course

Ic 20–32 Fill; 10YR 4/4, dark yellowish brown; very gravelly sandy clay loam; weak, very fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; mixed origin; no roots observed; abrupt, smooth lower boundary

Id 27–54 Fill; 7.5YR 3/4, dark brown; clay loam; moderate, medium, blocky structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; mixed origin; no roots observed; abrupt, smooth lower boundary

Ie 40–104 Fill; 5YR 3/4, dark reddish brown; clay loam; moderate, medium, blocky structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; abrupt, smooth lower boundary

If 92–117 Fill; 7.5YR 2.5/3, very dark brown; clay loam; moderate, medium, blocky structure; moist, very friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; abrupt, smooth lower boundary

IIa 110–125 A horizon; 10YR 3/1, very dark gray; silty clay; strong, medium, blocky structure; moist, firm consistence; no cementation; plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

IIb 118–162 Natural; 7.5YR 3/2, dark brown; silty clay; strong, medium, blocky structure; moist, firm consistence; no cementation; plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

IIc 137–238

Natural; 10YR 2/2, very dark brown; sand; structureless (single-grain); moist, loose consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; lower boundary not visible


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 119


T-11 is located in the central portion of the project area within parking stalls fronting the Evergreen Adult Day Center and the southern portion of 88 Palpal supermarket (see Figure 41). T-11 was placed in this area to target a former main dwelling observed in the 1891 Monsarrat map of Little Britain (see Figure 16). According to historic maps and aerial photographs, the area was relatively undeveloped after Little Britain until the early 1900s (see Figure 24) with multiple phases of dwellings in the near vicinity of the area until the late 1950s as it transitioned to the present-day parking lot area (see Figure 35). T-11 is oriented east-west direction and measures 6.1 m long by 0.7 m wide. The base of excavation was determined by the presence of sterile material at 1.75 mbs.

The stratigraphy observed within T-11 consists of asphalt (Stratum Ia), extremely gravelly sandy loam fill (Stratum Ib), silty clay fill (Stratum Ic), very gravelly silty clay fill (Stratum Id), very gravelly silty clay loam fill (Stratum Ie), a buried asphalt surface (Stratum If), very gravelly sandy loam fill (Ig), very gravelly silty clay fill (Stratum Ih), coarse sand fill (Stratum Ii), overlying naturally occurring silty clay (Stratum II).

The northern portion of the eastern sidewall of T-11 was not visible as it was obliterated from the excavation of T-7.

Strata Ia through Ii are a series of imported fill deposits related to the construction of the existing parking lot area in the late 1950s and likely represent activity related to former dwellings in the area between the early to mid-twentieth century (see Figure 20, Figure 24, and Figure 31). Stratum Ie contained demolition debris including concrete and basalt boulders; and historic artifacts including glass bottles and fragments, ceramic sherds, metal nails, and metal pieces that were observed, but not collected (Figure 71).

Stratum If is a discontinuous buried asphalt surface observed between 82 and 95 cmbs. According to historic maps and aerials Stratum If is related to a former road, Custer Street, which existed between 1920 through the early 1950s (see Figure 22 and Figure 29). Stratum If is considered a component of SIHP # -8802. For additional information please refer to Section 7 Historic Property Descriptions.


The southern portion of T-11 contained an in situ semi-extended human burial within Stratum II between 158 and 172 cmbs. The human burial was designated as SIHP # -8804. A burial pit was discernible in the northern portion of T-11 and physically softer than the surrounding area, however, no visible pit was observed. A very small amount of charcoal flecking was observed within the burial pit. Following the discovery of SIHP # -8804, excavation was suspended for the remainder of T-11. For additional information please refer to Section 7 Historic Property Descriptions.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 120

Figure 69. T-11 west sidewall, view to northwest (note water is from a leaking pipe, not the water table)



AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 121



Description


fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; marine origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary; imported crushed coral base course

Ic 14–23 Fill; 10YR 2/2, very dark brown; silty clay; weak, fine, blocky structure; moist, firm consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, broken lower boundary

Id 14–42 Fill; 5YR 3/3, dark reddish brown; very gravelly silty clay; moderate, fine, blocky structure; moist, firm consistence; no cementation; plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

Ie 36–95 Fill; 10YR 3/4, dark yellowish brown; very gravelly silty clay loam; weak, medium, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

If SIHP # -8802

82–95 Asphalt

Ig 82–99 Fill; 10YR 7/3, very pale brown; very gravelly sandy loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; marine origin; no roots observed; clear, broken lower boundary

Ih 82–106

Fill; 5YR 3/4, dark reddish brown; very gravelly silty clay; weak, coarse, blocky structure; moist, firm consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, discontinuous lower boundary

Ii 91–106

Fill; 10YR 2/1, black; coarse sand; structureless (single-grain); moist, loose consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, discontinuous lower boundary; volcanic cinder fill

II 135–175

Natural; 10YR 3/3, dark brown; silty clay; weak, medium, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; lower boundary not visible; tile lens observed in upper portion between 95 and 110 cmbs; SIHP # -8804 observed between 158 and 172 cmbs


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 122



AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 123


T-12 is located in the northeastern portion of the project area within a one-way thoroughfare for the shopping center fronting Coco’s Fish Market and Blue Pearl Church (see Figure 41). T-12 was placed in this area for general testing purposes (see Figure 16). According to historic maps and aerial photographs, the area was relatively undeveloped after Little Britain until the early 1900s (see Figure 24) with multiple phases of dwellings in the near vicinity of the area until the late 1950s as it transitioned to the present-day parking lot area (see Figure 35). T-12 is oriented east-west and measures 6.2 m long by 0.75 m wide. The base of excavation was determined by the presence of sterile material at 2.0 mbs.

The stratigraphy observed within T-12 consists of concrete (Stratum Ia), very gravelly sandy clay loam fill (Stratum Ib), overlying a silty clay loam A horizon (Stratum IIa), and naturally occurring silty clay loam (Stratum IIb) (Figure 72, Figure 73, and Table 14).

Strata Ia and Ib are imported fill deposits related to the construction of the existing parking lot/through way area and likely related to the construction of the existing shopping center built in the late 1950s (see Figure 35). Two metal nails from Stratum Ib were observed, but not collected (Figure 74).

Stratum IIa is a buried A horizon ranging from 35 to 99 cmbs. Minimal charcoal flecking was observed within the upper boundary. was not collected (Figure 74).

Stratum IIb represents a naturally occurring gravelly silt loam deposit consistent with the USDA soil data, Kawaihapai clay loam (KIA) for the project area and its vicinity (Foote et al. 1972). The lower portion of Stratum IIb contains a higher concentration of volcanic cinder.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 124




AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 125



Description

Ia 0–14 Concrete Ib 13–90 Fill; 5YR 4/3, reddish brown; very gravelly sandy clay loam; weak, fine,

granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, irregular lower boundary

IIa 35–99 A horizon; 10YR 4/4, dark yellowish brown; silty clay loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

IIb 84–200

Natural; 10YR 3/2, very dark grayish brown; silty clay loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; lower boundary not visible

Figure 74. Historic artifacts from Strata Ib and IIa that were observed, but not collected


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 126


T-13 is located in the eastern portion of the project area within a one-way thoroughfare at the southeast entrance of the Evergreen Adult Day Center (see Figure 41). T-13 was placed in this area for general testing purposes (see Figure 16). According to historic maps and aerial photographs, the area was relatively undeveloped until the early 1900s (see Figure 24) with multiple phases of dwellings in the near vicinity of the area until the late 1950s as it transitioned to the present-day parking lot area (see Figure 35). T-13 is oriented east-west and measures 6.1 m long by 0.67 m wide. The base of excavation was determined by the presence of sterile material at 2.23 mbs.

The stratigraphy observed within T-13 consists of asphalt (Stratum Ia), very gravelly silt loam fill (Stratum Ib), a buried asphalt surface (Stratum Ic), extremely gravelly sand fill (Stratum Id), gravelly silt loam fill (Stratum Ie), gravelly silt loam fill (Stratum If), gravelly silt loam fill (Stratum Ig), and a gravelly silt loam fill (Stratum Ih), overlying a naturally occurring silt loam (Stratum II) (Figure 72, Figure 73, and Table 14).

Strata Ia through If are a series of imported fill deposits related to the construction of the existing parking lot/through way area and likely related to the construction of the existing shopping center built in the late 1950s (see Figure 35). Strata Ie and If likely represent activity related to former dwellings in the area between the early to mid-twentieth century (see Figure 20, Figure 24, and Figure 31). Stratum Ie contained historic artifacts including glass fragments, metal nails, red brick, and a rubber hose, which were observed but not collected (Figure 80).

Stratum Ig is a disturbed natural deposit showing evidence of the initial stages of historical development within this portion of the project area. Stratum Ih was observed in the south sidewall, in the western portion of T-13 containing a demolition pit at 130 to 190 cmbs. Stratum Ih contained concrete debris, basalt cobbles, metal wire, a rubber hose, faunal bone, and a marine shell (Tellina sp.) midden pit.



AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 127

Figure 75. T-13 north sidewall, view to northwest



AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 128

Figure 77. T-13 south wall, view to south

Figure 78. T-13 south sidewall, close-up of midden area; view to south


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 129



AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 130



Description

Ia 0–10 Asphalt Ib 9–35 Fill; 10YR 2/1, black; very gravelly silt loam; weak, fine, granular

structure; moist, loose consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; abrupt, smooth lower boundary; imported basalt base course utilized for the asphalt surface

Ic 17–37 Asphalt Id 23–39 Fill; 7.5YR 7/6, reddish yellow; extremely gravelly sand; weak, fine,

granular structure; moist, loose consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; marine origin; no roots observed; abrupt, broken lower boundary; imported crushed coral fill utilized for the asphalt surface

Ie 30–47 Fill; 7.5YR 2.5/1, black; gravelly silt loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

If 33–110 Fill; 7.5YR 3/3, dark brown; gravelly silt loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

Ig 76–125 Fill; 10YR 3/3, dark brown; gravelly silt loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

Ih 125–187 Fill; 10YR 3/3, dark brown; gravelly silt loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; lower boundary not visible

II 120–223

Natural; 10YR 3/2, very dark grayish brown; gravelly silt loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 131

Figure 80. Historic artifacts observed within Strata If and Ig that were observed, but not collected


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 132


T-14 is located in the central portion of the project area within the parking area fronting the delivery area for 88 Palpal Supermarket (see Figure 41). T-14 was placed in this area for general testing purposes. According to historic maps and aerial photographs, the area was relatively undeveloped after Little Britain until the early 1900s (see Figure 24) with multiple phases of dwellings in the near vicinity of the area until the late 1950s as it transitioned to the present-day parking lot area (see Figure 35). T-4 was oriented in an east-west direction and measured 6.0 m long by 0.70 m wide. The base of excavation was determined by the presence of sterile material at 2.06 mbs.

The stratigraphy observed within T-14 consists of concrete (Stratum Ia), extremely gravelly silt loam fill (Stratum Ib), extremely gravelly sandy loam fill (Stratum Ic), gravelly sandy loam fill (Stratum Id), very gravelly silt loam fill (Stratum Ie), and a cobbly silty clay fill (Stratum If), overlying a naturally occurring gravelly silt loam (Stratum IIa), a naturally occurring sandy loam (Stratum IIb), and naturally occurring very gravelly sandy loam (Stratum IIc) (Figure 81, Figure 82, and Table 16).

Strata Ia through Ie are a series of imported fill deposits, related to the construction of the existing parking lot area in the late 1950s and likely represent activity related to former dwellings in the area between the early to mid-twentieth century (see Figure 20, Figure 24, and Figure 31). Stratum If is a disturbed natural deposit showing evidence of the initial stages of historical development within this portion of the project area. A cat burial was observed in the western portion of T-14 just east of two utility pipes, within the north wall of Stratum If between 42 and 67 cmbs. Additionally, a meadow vole bone and one glass bottle (Acc. # 6) was collected from Stratum If. Two utility pipes were observed within the eastern portion of T-14 within Stratum If at 37 and 52 cmbs. Approximately 55 cm of the east portion of T-14 was left unexcavated to avoid damaging both utility pipes.

Strata IIa through IIc represent a naturally occurring gravelly silt loam deposit consistent with the USDA soil data, Kawaihapai clay loam (KIA) for the project area and its vicinity (Foote et al. 1972). Strata IIb and IIc contains a higher concentration of volcanic cinder.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 133

Figure 81. T-14 northeast sidewall, view to north

Figure 82. T-14 northeast sidewall profile


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 134



Description

Ia 0–20 Concrete Ib 14–21 Fill; 10YR 5/1, gray; extremely gravelly silt loam; weak, fine, granular

structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary; imported basalt base course utilized for the concrete surface

Ic 17–28 Fill; 10YR 7/1, light gray; extremely gravelly sandy loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; marine origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary; imported crushed coral fill utilized for the concrete surface

Id 23–43 Fill; 10YR 6/4, light yellowish brown; gravelly sandy loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

Ie 33–46 Fill; 10YR 3/1, very dark gray; very gravelly silt loam; weak, medium, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, broken lower boundary

If 33–85 Fill; 10YR 3/2, very dark grayish brown; cobbly silty clay; moderate, medium, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; few, fine roots; clear, smooth lower boundary

IIa 62–120 Natural; 10YR 3/4, dark yellowish brown; gravelly silt loam; weak, medium, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; few, fine roots; clear, smooth lower boundary

IIb 100–190 Natural; 10YR 3/3, dark brown; sandy loam; moderate, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; few, fine to medium roots; clear, smooth lower boundary

IIc 175–194

Natural; 10YR 4/4, dark yellowish brown; very gravelly sandy loam; moderate, medium, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; lower boundary not visible


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 135


T-15 is located in the northeastern portion of the project area within parking stalls fronting a recently demolished building, formally Keeaumoku Produce (see Figure 41). T-15 was placed in this area to target the former servants’ quarters from Little Britain (see Figure 16). According to historic maps and aerial photographs, the area was relatively undeveloped after Little Britain until the early 1900s (see Figure 24) with multiple phases of dwellings in the near vicinity of the area until the late 1950s as it transitioned to the present-day parking lot area (see Figure 35). T-15 was oriented in an east-west direction and measured 6.0 m long by 0.75 m wide. The base of excavation was determined by the presence of sterile material at 2.05 mbs.

The stratigraphy observed within T-15 consists of concrete (Stratum Ia), extremely gravelly silty clay building fill, very gravelly silt loam fill (Stratum Ib), gravelly sandy loam fill (Stratum Ic), very gravelly silt loam fill (Stratum Id), and a very gravelly silt loam fill (Stratum Ie), overlying a very gravelly silty clay loam A horizon (Stratum IIa), and a naturally occurring very gravelly silt loam (Stratum IIb) (Figure 83, Figure 84, Figure 85, Figure 86, and Table 17).

Strata Ia through Id are a series of imported fill deposits, related to the construction of the existing parking lot area in the late 1950s and likely represent activity related to the former dwellings in the area between the early to mid-twentieth century (see Figure 20, Figure 24, and Figure 31). Stratum Ie is a disturbed natural deposit showing evidence of the initial stages of historical development within this portion of the project area. Strata Ic through Ie contained historic artifacts ranging from 20 to 102 cmbs. Samples collected from Stratum Ic included two glass bottle fragments (Acc. #s 35 and 36). Samples collected from Stratum Id included a ceramic fragment and piece of rubber (Acc. #s 87 and 88). Samples collected from Stratum Ie included glass bottles and fragments and ceramic fragments (Acc. #s 89–103). The southern sidewall of T-15 contained a wall of square concrete blocks related to a recently demolished building foundation associated with the existing shopping center ranging from 20 to 60 cmbs.

Stratum IIa is a buried A horizon ranging from 82 to 125 cmbs. The upper portion of Stratum IIa contained less than 15% of charcoal. No additional cultural materials were observed.

Stratum IIb represents a naturally occurring gravelly silt loam deposit consistent with the USDA soil data, Kawaihapai clay loam (KIA) for the project area and its vicinity (Foote et al. 1972). The lower portion of Stratum IIb contains a higher concentration of volcanic cinder.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 136

Figure 83. T-15 north sidewall, view to northeast



AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 137

Figure 85. T-15 south sidewall, view to south



AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 138



Description

Ia 0–22 Concrete Building fill

22–60 Fill; 10YR 8/1, white; extremely gravelly silty clay; weak, medium, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; mixed origin; no roots observed; clear, discontinuous lower boundary

Ib 12–34 Fill; 10YR 3/3, dark brown; very gravelly silt loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary, imported basalt base course

Ic 20–41 Fill; 10YR 8/1, white; gravelly sandy loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; marine origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

Id 35–61 Fill; 5YR 4/6, yellowish red; very gravelly silt loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

Ie 56–102 Fill; 10YR 5/3, brown; very gravelly silt loam; weak, medium, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; few, fine roots; clear, smooth lower boundary

IIa 82–125 A horizon; 10YR 3/2, very dark grayish brown; very gravelly silty clay loam; weak, fine, blocky structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; few, fine to medium roots; clear, smooth lower boundary

IIb 110–206

Natural; 10YR 2/2, very dark brown; very gravelly silt loam; weak, fine, blocky structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; few, medium roots; lower boundary not visible


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 139


T-16 is located in the northern portion of the project area within the parking area fronting Yakiniku Don-Day restaurant (see Figure 41). T-16 was placed in this area to target a former ditch observed in the 1891 Monsarrat map of Little Britain (see Figure 16). According to historic maps and aerial photographs, the area was relatively undeveloped after Little Britain until the early 1900s (see Figure 24) with multiple phases of dwellings in the near vicinity of the area until the late 1950s as it transitioned to the present-day parking lot area (see Figure 35). T-16 is oriented east-west and measures 6.0 m long by 0.70 m wide. The base of excavation was determined by the presence of sterile material at 1.94 mbs.

According to historic maps, a former roadway present from the mid-1930s through the early 1940s was observed in the area of the former ditch (see Figure 27 and Figure 29). The construction of the road in conjunction with development in the area suggests any remnant of the former ditch was likely obliterated.

The stratigraphy observed within T-16 consists of asphalt (Stratum Ia), gravelly sand fill (Stratum Ib), gravelly sandy loam fill (Stratum Ic), gravelly sandy loam fill (Stratum Id), overlying and a gravelly sandy loam fill (Stratum Ie), overlying a naturally occurring gravelly silt loam (Stratum II) (Figure 87, Figure 88, and Table 18).

Strata Ia through Ic are a series of imported fill deposits, related to the construction of the existing parking lot area in the late 1950s. Strata Id and Ie are disturbed natural deposits likely related to the former dwellings in the area between the early to mid-twentieth century (see Figure 20, Figure 24, and Figure 31). A concrete slab was observed at approximately 50 cmbs between Strata Ic and Id. The concrete slab measured approximately 250 cm long and extended into the east and west walls for an unknown length. The area beneath the concrete slab was left unexcavated. Stratum Id contained historic artifacts ranging from 60 cm to 100 cmbs. Samples collected from Stratum Id include glass bottles and fragments, ceramic sherds, metal nails, (Acc. #s 53–70). Samples collected from Stratum Ie include ceramic sherds (Acc. #s 1–4).

Stratum II represents a naturally occurring gravelly silt loam deposit consistent with the USDA soil data, Kawaihapai clay loam (KIA) for the project area and its vicinity (Foote et al. 1972). The lower portion of Stratum IIb contains a higher concentration of volcanic cinder.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 140

Figure 87. T-16 northwest sidewall, view to northwest

Figure 88. T-16 northwest sidewall profile


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 141



Description

Ia 0–19 Asphalt Ib 18–25 Base course; 2.5YR 8/2, pale yellow; gravelly sand; weak, fine, granular

structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; abrupt, smooth lower boundary

Ic 24–50 Fill; 7.5YR 3/3, dark brown; gravelly sandy loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; few, coarse roots; abrupt, smooth lower boundary

Id 38–112 Fill; 10YR 4/2, dark grayish brown; gravelly sandy loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; few, medium roots; diffuse, smooth lower boundary

Ie 87–151 Fill; 10YR 3/2, very dark grayish brown; gravelly sandy loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; lower boundary not visible; disturbed natural deposit

II 151–194

Natural; 10YR 3/3, dark brown; gravelly silt loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; lower boundary not visible


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 142

4.1.17 Test Excavation 17a (T-17a)

T-17a is located in the central portion of the project area within parking stalls fronting the Evergreen Adult Day Center and the southern portion of 88 Palpal supermarket (see Figure 41). T-17a was placed in this area to target a former main dwelling observed in the 1891 Monsarrat map of Little Britain and for additional testing following the discovery of SIHP # -8804, human skeletal remains (see Figure 16). According to historic maps and aerial photographs, the area was relatively undeveloped after Little Britain until the early 1900s (see Figure 24) with multiple phases of dwellings in the near vicinity of the area until the late 1950s as it transitioned to the present-day parking lot area (see Figure 35). T-17a is oriented northeast-southwest and measures 6.5 m long by 0.61 m wide. The base of excavation was determined by the presence of sterile material at 1.93 mbs.

The stratigraphy observed within T-17a consists of asphalt (Stratum Ia), extremely gravelly sand fill (Stratum Ib), silty clay fill (Stratum Ic), silt loam fill (Stratum Id), clay loam fill (Stratum Ie), gravelly silty clay loam fill (Stratum If), redeposited silty clay loam fill (Stratum IIa), redeposited very gravelly sandy loam fill (Stratum IIb), overlying a silt loam A horizon (Stratum IIIa), a naturally occurring silt loam (Stratum IIIb), and a naturally occurring very gravelly sandy loam (Stratum IIIc) (Figure 89, Figure 90, and Table 19).

Strata Ia through Id are a series of imported fill deposits, related to the construction of the existing parking lot area in the late 1950s, and likely represents activity related to former dwellings in the area between the early to mid-twentieth century (see Figure 20, Figure 24, and Figure 31). Strata Ie through IIb are disturbed natural deposits showing evidence of the initial stages of historical development within this portion of the project area. Stratum Ie contained historic artifacts ranging from 28 cm to 87 cmbs. Samples collected from Stratum Ie include one glass bottle and a glass marble (Acc. #s 11 and 12).

Stratum IIIa is a charcoal-enriched buried A horizon ranging from 142 to 185 cmbs. Stratum IIIa is designated as SIHP # -8803. Three pit features were identified, SIHP # -8803 Features 1 through 3. A bulk sediment sample was collected from each feature. ple (column sample 3) was collected in the northeastern portion of T-17a between 130 and 140 cmbs (Figure 91).

-8803 Feature 1 is a pit feature of indeterminate function located within the northeastern portion of T-17a within the southeast sidewall (Figure 92 and Figure 93). Feature 1 measured 20 cm wide and extends from 141 to 159 cmbs. Feature 1 originated within Stratum IIb and terminated within Stratum IIIb159 cmbs.

-8803 Feature 2 is a pit feature of indeterminate function located within the central portion of T-17a within the southeast sidewall (Figure 93). Feature 2 measured 140 cm wide and extends from 135 to 177 cmbs. Feature 2 originated within Stratum IIb and terminated within Stratum IIIb

-8803 Feature 3 is a pit feature of indeterminate function located within the southwest portion of T-17a within the southeast sidewall (Figure 94). Feature 3 measured 70 cm wide and extends from 140 to 175 cmbs. Feature 3 originated within Stratum IIb and terminated within Stratum IIIb 145 to 155 cmbs.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 143

Strata IIIb and IIIc represent a naturally occurring gravelly silt loam deposit consistent with the USDA soil data, Kawaihapai clay loam (KIA) for the project area and its vicinity (Foote et al. 1972). Strata IIIc contains a higher concentration of volcanic cinder.

Figure 89. T-17a southeast sidewall, view to east


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 144

Figure 90. T-17a southeast sidewall profile


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 145

Table 19. T-17a stratigraphic description


Description

Ia 0–13 Asphalt Ib 10–17 Fill; 10YR 8/2, very pale brown; extremely gravelly sand; structureless

(single-grain); moist, loose consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; marine origin; no roots observed; abrupt, smooth lower boundary

Ic 14–30 Fill; 10YR 2/1, black; silty clay; weak, fine, blocky structure; moist, firm consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

Id 14–40 Fill; 2.5YR 2.5/4, dark reddish brown; silt loam; moderate, very fine, granular structure; moist, loose consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; abrupt, smooth lower boundary

Ie 28–87 Fill; 10YR 3/3, dark brown; clay loam; moderate, fine, blocky structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; abrupt, smooth lower boundary

If 87–107 Fill; 10YR 5/8, yellowish brown; gravelly silty clay loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; abrupt, smooth lower boundary; redeposited material containing a white tile lens

IIa 98–150 Fill; 10YR 3/3, dark brown; silty clay loam; weak, fine, blocky structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; abrupt, irregular lower boundary, redeposited material

IIb 113–178 Fill; 10YR 4/4, dark yellowish brown; very gravelly sandy loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, loose consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, irregular lower boundary; redeposited material

IIIa; SIHP # -8803

113–177 A horizon; 10YR 2/1, black; silt loam; weak, very fine, granular structure; moist, loose consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, irregular lower boundary; a component of SIHP # -8803

IIIb 142–191 Natural; 10YR 4/6, dark yellowish brown; silty loam; weak, very fine, granular structure; moist, loose consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, irregular lower boundary

IIIc 177–193

Natural; 10YR 4/4, dark yellowish brown; very gravelly sandy loam; moderate, medium, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; lower boundary not visible


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 146

Figure 91. T-17a column sample, third down is SIHP # -8803, and bulk sample of SIHP # -8803 Feature 1 at the bottom right, southeast sidewall


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 147

Figure 92. T-17a, SIHP # -8803 Feature 1, southeast wall, view to southeast

Figure 93. T-17a, SIHP # -8803 Feature 1 (left) and Feature 2 (right), southeast wall, view to northeast


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 148

Figure 94. T-17a, SIHP # -8803 Feature 3 southeast wall, view to south


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 149


T-18 is located in the central portion of the project area within parking stalls fronting the Evergreen Adult Day Center and the southern portion of 88 Palpal supermarket (see Figure 41). T-11 was placed in this area to target a former main dwelling observed in the 1891 Monsarrat map of Little Britain and for additional testing following the discovery of SIHP # -8804, human skeletal remains (see Figure 16). According to historic maps and aerial photographs, the area was relatively undeveloped after Little Britain until the early 1900s (see Figure 24) with multiple phases of dwellings in the near vicinity of the area until the late 1950s as it transitioned to the present-day parking lot area (see Figure 35). T-18 is oriented east-west direction and measures 7.5 m long by 0.95 m wide. The base of excavation was determined by the presence of sterile material at 1.98 mbs.

The stratigraphy observed within T-17a consists of asphalt (Stratum Ia), extremely gravelly sandy loam fill (Stratum Ib), stony silty clay fill (Stratum Ic), silty clay fill (Stratum Id), gravelly silty clay loam fill (Stratum Ie), overlying a very gravelly silty clay A horizon (Stratum IIa), a naturally occurring silt loam (Stratum IIb), and a natural occurring loam (Stratum IIc) (Figure 95, Figure 96, and Table 20).

Strata Ia through Ie are a series of imported fill deposits, related to the construction of the existing parking lot area in the late 1950s and likely represent activity related to former dwellings in the area between the early to mid-twentieth century (see Figure 20, Figure 24, and Figure 31). Stratum Id contained historic artifacts and faunal material ranging from 22 to 86 cmbs. Samples collected from Stratum Id include one glass and ceramic jar (Acc. #s 115 and 116). The eastern portion of T-11 contained a trench scar from T-19.

Stratum IIa is a buried A horizon ranging from 85 to 149 cmbs. The upper portion of Stratum IIa contained less than 15% of charcoal. Two historic artifacts were collected, one glass fragment and one ceramic fragment (Acc. #s 85 and 86).



AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 150

Figure 95. T-18 north sidewall, view to northeast



AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 151



Description


fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; marine origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary; imported crushed coral base course

Ic 16–56 Fill; 5YR 3/3, dark reddish brown; stony silty clay; moderate, fine, blocky structure; moist, firm consistence; no cementation; plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

Id 22–86 Fill; 10YR 2/2, very dark brown; silty clay; weak, fine, blocky structure; moist, firm consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

Ie 80–103 Fill; 10YR 5/8, yellowish brown; gravelly silty clay loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; abrupt, smooth lower boundary


IIb 132–184 Natural; 10YR 3/3, dark brown; silt loam; weak, medium, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

IIc 180–198

Natural; 10YR 2/2, very dark brown; gravelly loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; non-plastic; strong cementation; terrigenous; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 152


T-19 is located in the central portion of the project area within parking stalls fronting the Evergreen Adult Day Center and the southern portion of 88 Palpal supermarket (see Figure 41). T-19 was placed in this area to target a former main dwelling observed in the 1891 Monsarrat map of Little Britain and for additional testing following the discovery of SIHP # -8804, human skeletal remains (see Figure 16). According to historic maps and aerial photographs, the area was relatively undeveloped after Little Britain until the early 1900s (see Figure 24) with multiple phases of dwellings in the near vicinity of the area until the late 1950s as it transitioned to the present-day parking lot area (see Figure 35). T-19 is oriented northeast-southwest and measures 6.2 m long by 0.90 m wide. The base of excavation was determined by the presence of sterile material at 2.30 mbs.

The stratigraphy observed within T-19 consists of asphalt (Stratum Ia), extremely gravelly sandy loam fill (Stratum Ib), silty clay fill (Stratum Ic), stony silty clay fill (Stratum Id), a buried asphalt layer (Stratum Ie), very gravelly sandy loam fill (Stratum If), very gravelly silty clay fill (Stratum Ig), coarse sand fill (Stratum Ih), very gravelly silty clay fill (Stratum Ii), overlying a very gravelly silty clay loam A horizon (Stratum IIa), a naturally occurring silt loam (Stratum IIb), and a naturally occurring gravelly sandy loam (Stratum IIc) (Figure 97, Figure 98, and Table 21).

Strata Ia through Id are a series of imported fill deposits related to the construction of the existing parking lot area in the late 1950s and activity related to former dwellings in the area between the early to mid-twentieth century (see Figure 20, Figure 24, and Figure 31). Strata Ic and Id contained historic artifacts and faunal material ranging from 17 to 87 cmbs. Samples collected from Stratum Ic include one glass bottle (Acc. # 71). Samples collected from Stratum Id include glass bottles, ceramic sherds, a ceramic doorknob, milled wood, and a metal nail (Acc. #s 117–123).

Stratum Ie is a buried asphalt surface prior to the existing parking lot built in the 1950s. Stratum Ie was observed between 81 and 93 cmbs discontinuously throughout T-19. According to historic maps and aerials Stratum Ie is related to a former road, Custer Street, which existed between 1920 through the early 1950s (see Figure 22 and Figure 29). Stratum Ie is considered a component of SIHP # -8802. For additional information please refer to Section 7 Historic Property Descriptions.

Stratum IIa is a buried A horizon ranging from 88 to 145 cmbs. The upper portion of Stratum IIa contained less than 15% of charcoal. No additional cultural materials were observed.



AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 153

Figure 97. T-19 east sidewall, view to southeast

Figure 98. T-19 east sidewall profile


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 154



Description


fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; marine origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary; imported crushed coral base course with asphalt inclusions

Ic 17–55 Fill; 10YR 2/2, very dark brown; silty clay; weak, fine, blocky structure; moist, firm consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

Id 30–87 Fill; 5YR 3/3, dark reddish brown; stony silty clay; moderate, fine, blocky structure; moist, firm consistence; no cementation; plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

Ie; SIHP # -8804

81–93 Asphalt

If 82–93 Fill; 10YR 7/3, very pale brown; very gravelly sandy loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; marine origin; no roots observed; clear, broken lower boundary; imported crushed coral base course utilized for the asphalt surface

Ig 93–97 Fill; 10YR 3/2, very dark grayish brown; very gravelly silty clay; weak, fine, blocky structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; few, fine to medium roots; clear, discontinuous lower boundary

Ih 93–104 Fill; 10YR 2/1, black; coarse sand; structureless (single-grain); moist, loose consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, discontinuous lower boundary; volcanic cinder lens

Ii 84–106 Fill; 5YR 3/4, dark reddish brown; very gravelly silty clay; weak, coarse, blocky structure; moist, firm consistence; no cementation; non-plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, discontinuous lower boundary; imported fill


IIb 117–203 Natural; 10YR 3/3, dark brown; silt loam; weak, medium, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; no cementation; slightly plastic; terrigenous origin; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

IIc 190–230

Natural; 10YR 2/2, very dark brown; gravelly sandy loam; weak, fine, granular structure; moist, friable consistence; non-plastic; strong cementation; terrigenous; no roots observed; clear, smooth lower boundary

Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: WAIKIKI 249 Results of Laboratory Analysis

AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 155

Section 5 Results of Laboratory Analysis Materials collected in the field were curated and analyzed by CSH personnel as described in

Section 2.2. Laboratory analyses include historic artifact analysis conducted by Ashley Goodfellow, B.A., and faunal analysis conducted by Alison Welser, M.A., and Allison Hummel, M.Sc.

There were 133 historic artifacts collected during the project. The collection includes 47 glass

bottles (Acc. #s 6, 9, 10–11, 15, 18, 21–25, 29, 31–32, 34–38, 40–42, 51–52, 54–56, 58–60, 71,83, 86, 89–92, 94, 96–97, 106–108, 118–120, and 127) and eight glass jars (Acc. #s 30, 53, 63, 72, 95, 98, 104, and 115), one pressed glass tumbler (Acc. # 57), four glass marbles (Acc. #s 12, 26–27, and 49), one flat glass fragment (Acc. # 16), two modern glass fragments (Acc. #s 33 and 93), 34 ceramic vessels (Acc. #s 1–5, 17, 19, 43–47, 50, 61, 64–68, 73–75, 84–85, 100–102, 105, 109–111, 113, 116, and 121), one chamber pot (Acc. # 76), one ceramic door knob (Acc. # 123), two ceramic marbles (Acc. #s 28 and 69), one porcelain Prosser button (Acc. # 48), one porcelain knob (Acc. # 20) and one porcelain wall tube (Acc. # 103) from an electrical wiring system, one porcelain insulator (Acc. # 112), two unknown ceramic fragments (Acc. #s 87 and 99), one ceramic and metal spark plug (Acc. # 114), one bone button (Acc. # 131), one mother of pearl shell button (Acc. # 132), two milled wood (Acc. #s 122 and 133), 13 metal nails (Acc. #s 7, 13–14, 39, 62, 77–80, 117, 124, and 129–130), one metal plug cartridge fuse (Acc. # 81), one unknown metal fragment (Acc. # 8), one Bakelite fragment (Acc. # 82), one plastic and metal “Type S” fuse (Acc. # 128), two mica windows for fuses (Acc. #s 125–126), one rubber fragment (Acc. # 88), and one composite fragment (Acc. # 70). The artifacts are described in Table 22.

5.1.1 Glass Artifact Analysis

Glass artifacts consist of 47 bottles (Acc. #s 6, 9, 10–11, 15, 18, 21–25, 29, 31–32, 34–38, 40–42, 51–52, 54–56, 58–60, 71, 83, 86, 89–92, 94, 96–97, 106–108, 118–120, and 127), eight jars (Acc. #s 30, 53, 63, 72, 95, 98, 104, and 115), one tumbler (Acc. # 57), four marbles (Acc. #s 12, 26–27, and 49), one flat glass fragment (Acc. # 16), and two modern fragments (Acc. #s 33 and 93).

5.1.1.1 Glass Bottles

The terminology used to describe bottle traits and dating information is based on information from the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Society of Historic Archaeology (SHA) “Historic Glass Bottle Identification and Information Website” (BLM/SHA 2018), unless otherwise noted. Bottle research is focused on function and date of manufacture, using reference texts and online resources to identify makers’ marks and company histories.

5.1.1.1.1 Mold-blown bottles (1800-mid twentieth century) Around ca. 1800, glassworkers began to blow bottles in molds. Most molds were made from

metal, but wood, ceramic, fired clay, clay-lined wood, soapstone, and other materials were sometimes used. Types of bottle molds include one-piece dip mold, three-piece dip mold, four-piece mold, two-piece mold, and turn mold. The body features left by these different molds provide information about the age of the artifact.

Cultu

ral S

urve

ys H

awai

‘i Jo

b Co

de: W

AIK

IKI 2

49

Re

sults

of L

abor

ator

y A

naly

sis

AIS

R fo

r the

TMK

s: [1

] 2-3

-018

:052

–060

, 074

, 075

, and

077

15

6

Tabl

e 22

. Sum

mar

y of

his

toric

arti

fact

s

Pr

oven

ienc

e M

ater

ial

Typ

e D

escr

iptio

n O

rigi

n A

ge

1 T-

16, S

tr. II

a,

140

cmbs

C

eram

ic

Flat

war

e Ea

rthen

war

e w

ith e

dge

deco

ratio

n, w

hite

war

e,

flatw

are,

pla

te, b

ody

to ri

m fr

agm

ent,

unsc

allo

ped

rim

with

impr

esse

d m

oldi

ng in

sim

ple

patte

rn, p

aint

ed

unde

r the

gla

ze in

blu

e

Euro

-A

mer

ica

1840

s-18

60s

2 T-

16, S

tr. II

a,

140

cmbs

C

eram

ic

Flat

war

e C

anto

n po

rcel

ain,

hol

low

war

e, sh

allo

w d

ish,

one

bas

e to

rim

and

one

bas

e to

bod

y fr

agm

ent,

bord

er p

atte

rn

with

cris

scro

ssed

latti

ce in

blu

e ba

nd a

bove

“cl

oud

and

rain

”, b

lue

and

whi

te la

ndsc

ape

scen

e in

terio

r ba

se, t

rans

pare

nt g

laze

with

gre

en/g

ray

tint,

no

foot

ring,

ung

laze

d ba

se, m

ade

for e

xpor

t mar

ket

Chi

na

1785

-185

3

3 T-

16, S

tr. II

a,

140

cmbs

C

eram

ic

Flat

war

e Ea

rthen

war

e, w

hite

war

e, fl

atw

are,

bod

y fr

agm

ent,

unde

rgla

ze b

lue

trans

fer p

rinte

d pa

ttern

Eu

ro-

Am

eric

a Pr

e- /

early

19

00s

4 T-

16, S

tr. II

a,

140

cmbs

C

eram

ic

Hol

low

war

e Ea

rthen

war

e, w

hite

war

e, h

ollo

ww

are,

bod

y fr

agm

ent,

unde

rgla

ze m

ulbe

rry

trans

fer p

rinte

d pa

ttern

Eu

ro-

Am

eric

a 18

29-1

867

5 T-

2; S

tr. If

C

eram

ic

Tabl

ewar

e Po

rcel

ain,

tabl

ewar

e, b

ase

to b

ody

frag

men

t, bl

ue

hand

-pai

nted

dec

orat

ion

(pos

sibl

y pi

neco

nes)

C

hina

Po

st-1

852

6 T-

14; S

tr. If

G

lass

B

ottle

C

olor

less

Ajin

omot

o bo

ttle,

mol

d-bl

own,

two-

piec

e cu

p-bo

ttom

, too

led

pate

nt fi

nish

, bas

e em

boss

ed w

ith

“ess

ence

of t

aste

” ch

arac

ters

, “”

Japa

n ca

. 190

9

7 T-

4; S

tr. Ic

; 30

cm

bs

Met

al

Nai

l W

ire n

ail,

com

plet

e, ro

und

head

, rou

nd sh

aft,

cons

iste

ntly

shap

ed sh

ank,

poi

nted

nai

l end

U

nite

d St

ates

Pos

t-189

4

8 T-

4; S

tr. Ic

; 30

cm

bs

Met

al

Unk

now

n Fe

rrou

s met

al (i

ron)

shaf

t with

flat

hea

d U

nkno

wn

Unk

now

n

9 T-

4; S

tr. Ic

; 30

cm

bs

Gla

ss

Bot

tle

Emer

ald

gree

n bo

ttle

body

frag

men

t U

nkno

wn

Unk

now

n

Cultu

ral S

urve

ys H

awai

‘i Jo

b Co

de: W

AIK

IKI 2

49

Re

sults

of L

abor

ator

y A

naly

sis

AIS

R fo

r the

TMK

s: [1

] 2-3

-018

:052

–060

, 074

, 075

, and

077

15

7

Pr

oven

ienc

e M

ater

ial

Typ

e D

escr

iptio

n O

rigi

n A

ge

10

T-4;

Str.

Ic;

30 c

mbs

G

lass

B

ottle

Soda

Wat

er W

orks

, one

bas

e to

bod

y, o

ne h

eel,

and

one

body

frag

men

t, m

achi

ne-m

ade,

hon

eyco

mb

patte

rn fr

om m

old

on h

eel a

nd b

ody,

em

boss

ed

“ 11, 1

922]

” on

the

heel

and

“[2

]031

-I

lo

go) 4

7 / 2

” on

the

base

Uni

ted

Stat

es 1

920-

ca.

1961

11

T-17

a; S

tr. Ie

Gla

ss

Bot

tle

Soda

Wat

er W

orks

, com

plet

e, m

achi

ne-m

ade,

cro

wn

top

finis

h, h

oney

com

b pa

ttern

mol

ded

on b

ottle

, sh

ould

er e

mbo

ssed

“Sm

ile //

Sm

ile”

in c

ursi

ve, h

eel

embo

ssed

, “JU

LY 1

1, 1

922”

, bas

e em

boss

ed, “

2031

/ 20

-I

logo

) 48

/ 2”

Uni

ted

Stat

es 1

920-

ca.

1961

12

T-17

a; S

tr. Ie

Gla

ss

Mar

ble

Gla

ss m

arbl

e, m

achi

ne-m

ade,

swirl

ing

whi

te, y

ello

w,

and

gree

n co

lore

d gl

ass

Uni

ted

Stat

es P

ost-1

910

13

T-3;

Str.

Ig

Met

al

Nai

l W

ire n

ail,

com

plet

e, ro

und

head

, rou

nd sh

aft,

cons

iste

ntly

shap

ed sh

ank,

poi

nted

nai

l end

U

nite

d St

ates

Pos

t-189

4

14

T-3;

Str.

Ig

Met

al

Nai

l M

achi

ne-c

ut, m

achi

ne-h

eade

d na

il, re

ctan

gula

r-sh

aped

hea

d, sh

aft o

f uni

form

thic

knes

s, bl

unt n

ail

end

Uni

ted

Stat

es 1

835-

1890

15

T-3;

Str.

Ig

Gla

ss

Bot

tle

“7-u

p ®

” gr

een

soda

bot

tle, n

eck

to fi

nish

frag

men

t, m

achi

ne-m

ade,

cro

wn

top

finis

h U

nkno

wn,

m

ost l

ikel

y U

nite

d St

ates

Post

-190

8

16

T-3;

Str.

Ig

Gla

ss

Flat

Pa

le b

lue

aqua

flat

gla

ss, m

oder

n, g

reat

er th

an

3.17

5 m

m

Uni

ted

Stat

es M

oder

n

Cultu

ral S

urve

ys H

awai

‘i Jo

b Co

de: W

AIK

IKI 2

49

Re

sults

of L

abor

ator

y A

naly

sis

AIS

R fo

r the

TMK

s: [1

] 2-3

-018

:052

–060

, 074

, 075

, and

077

15

8

Pr

oven

ienc

e M

ater

ial

Typ

e D

escr

iptio

n O

rigi

n A

ge

17

T-3;

Str.

Ig

Cer

amic

H

ollo

ww

are

Porc

elai

n, h

ollo

ww

are,

rice

bow

l, ba

se to

bod

y fr

agm

ent,

unde

rgla

ze b

lue

hand

-pai

nted

dec

orat

ion

Chi

na

Post

-185

2

18

T-3;

Str.

Ig

Gla

ss

Bot

tle

Cyl

indr

ical

am

ber b

leac

h bo

ttle,

bas

e fr

agm

ent,

embo

ssed

“(D

iam

ond-

s mar

k) 1

4A /

REG

. di

amon

d tra

dem

ark)

20

-3”

Uni

ted

Stat

es P

ost-1

940

19

T-3;

Str.

Ig

Cer

amic

H

ollo

ww

are

Porc

elai

n, h

ollo

ww

are,

stra

ight

-sid

ed c

up, b

ody

to

rim fr

agm

ent,

unde

rgla

ze b

lue

arou

nd ri

m

Japa

n Po

st-1

868

20

T-3;

Str.

Ig

Cer

amic

In

sula

tor

Porc

elai

n, in

sula

tor,

knob

, mul

tipar

t mol

d, fi

nish

ed

with

a w

hite

gla

ze

Uni

ted

Stat

es 1

890-

1932

21

T-1;

Str.

Id,

30 c

mbs

G

lass

B

ottle

A

mbe

r Dai

Nip

pon

expo

rt st

yle

beer

bot

tle, c

ompl

ete

exce

pt fo

r chi

p in

nec

k/fin

ish,

mac

hine

-mad

e, c

row

n to

p fin

ish,

em

boss

ed “

TRA

DE

(sun

logo

) MA

RK

(m

onog

ram

of l

ette

rs D

NB

)” o

n sh

ould

er, “

DA

I

(fiv

e-po

inte

d st

ar) 6

/ Y

” on

bas

e

Japa

n Po

st-1

911

22

T-1;

Str.

Id,

30 c

mbs

G

lass

B

ottle

co

mpl

ete

exce

pt fo

r chi

p in

nec

k/fin

ish,

mac

hine

-m

ade,

cro

wn

top

finis

h, e

mbo

ssed

“TR

AD

E (s

un

logo

) MA

RK

(mon

ogra

m o

f let

ters

DN

B)”

on

heel

, and

“14

(fiv

e-po

inte

d st

ar) 1

0 / Y

” on

bas

e

Japa

n Po

st-1

911

23

T-1;

Str.

Id,

30 c

mbs

G

lass

B

ottle

A

mbe

r gla

ss b

eer b

ottle

, com

plet

e, m

achi

ne-m

ade,

cr

own

top

finis

h, e

mbo

ssed

“JA

PAN

/ 1”

on

base

Ja

pan

Post

-192

1

24

T-1;

Str.

Id,

30 c

mbs

G

lass

B

ottle

m

achi

ne-

suct

ion

scar

on

base

, em

boss

ed “

JAPA

N /

5” o

n ba

se

Japa

n Po

st-1

921

Cultu

ral S

urve

ys H

awai

‘i Jo

b Co

de: W

AIK

IKI 2

49

Re

sults

of L

abor

ator

y A

naly

sis

AIS

R fo

r the

TMK

s: [1

] 2-3

-018

:052

–060

, 074

, 075

, and

077

15

9

Pr

oven

ienc

e M

ater

ial

Typ

e D

escr

iptio

n O

rigi

n A

ge

25

T-1;

Str.

Id,

30 c

mbs

G

lass

B

ottle

ba

se to

bod

y fr

agm

ent,

mac

hine

-mad

e, e

mbo

ssed

“JA

PAN

.” o

n ba

se

Japa

n Po

st-1

921

26

T-5;

Str.

If

Gla

ss

Mar

ble

Gla

ss m

arbl

e, m

achi

ne-m

ade,

swirl

ing

blac

k, b

lue,

an

d w

hite

col

ored

gla

ss

Uni

ted

Stat

es P

ost-1

910

27

T-5;

Str.

If

Gla

ss

Mar

ble

Gla

ss m

arbl

e, m

achi

ne-m

ade,

swirl

ing

gree

n, y

ello

w,

and

whi

te c

olor

ed g

lass

U

nite

d St

ates

Pos

t-191

0

28

T-5;

Str.

If

Cer

amic

M

arbl

e Ea

rthen

war

e “c

lay”

mar

ble,

mac

hine

-mad

e, re

ddis

h co

lor

Euro

-A

mer

ica

1859

-193

0s

29

T-5;

Str.

If

Gla

ss

Bot

tle

Col

orle

ss m

ilk b

ottle

, mac

hine

-mad

e, n

eck

to ri

m

frag

men

t, ca

psea

t fin

ish,

hor

izon

tal s

eam

on

outs

ide

edge

of f

inis

h

Uni

ted

Stat

es L

ate

1890

s-m

id-

twen

tieth

ce

ntur

y 30

T-

5; S

tr. If

G

lass

Ja

r Em

eral

d gr

een

glas

s jar

, pos

sibl

y ca

nnin

g or

food

st

orag

e ja

r, m

achi

ne-m

ade,

nec

k to

fini

sh fr

agm

ent,

wid

e m

outh

ext

erna

l thr

ead

finis

h

Unk

now

n Po

st-1

915

31

T-5;

Str.

If

Gla

ss

Bot

tle

Col

orle

ss g

lass

bot

tle o

r pos

sibl

y ja

r, m

achi

ne-m

ade

(pre

ss-a

nd-b

low

), ba

se fr

agm

ent w

ith v

alve

or

ejec

tion

mar

k, e

mbo

ssed

“23

” on

bas

e

Uni

ted

Stat

es 1

900s

-194

0s

32

T-5;

Str.

If

Gla

ss

Bot

tle

Am

ber g

lass

Lys

ol D

isin

fect

ant b

ottle

, com

plet

e,

mac

hine

-mad

e, sm

all m

outh

ext

erna

l thr

ead

finis

h,

embo

ssed

“Ly

sol L

ysol

// L

ysol

Lys

ol”

on sh

ould

er in

cu

rsiv

e an

d “

. J.”

in c

ircl

MA

DE

/ IN

U. S

. A.”

on

base

Uni

ted

Stat

es 1

927-

1964

33

T-5;

Str.

If

Gla

ss

Arc

hite

ctur

al

Arc

hite

ctur

al g

lass

, pre

ssed

, rel

ief m

olde

d, m

oder

n U

nkno

wn

Unk

now

n

Cultu

ral S

urve

ys H

awai

‘i Jo

b Co

de: W

AIK

IKI 2

49

Re

sults

of L

abor

ator

y A

naly

sis

AIS

R fo

r the

TMK

s: [1

] 2-3

-018

:052

–060

, 074

, 075

, and

077

16

0

Pr

oven

ienc

e M

ater

ial

Typ

e D

escr

iptio

n O

rigi

n A

ge

34

T-5;

Str.

If

Gla

ss

Bot

tle

Col

orle

ss C

oca-

Col

a ho

bble

-ski

rt so

da b

ottle

, co

mpl

ete,

mac

hine

-mad

e, c

row

n to

p fin

ish,

shou

lder

em

boss

ed “

Coc

a-C

ola

/ TR

AD

E-M

AR

K

-105

529

// C

oca-

Col

a / T

RA

DE-

MA

RK

REG

ISTE

RED

/ M

IN.

- 4.

(D

iam

ond-

I log

o) 5

.”

Uni

ted

Stat

es 1

945

35

T-15

; Str.

Ic,

20-4

1 cm

bs

Gla

ss

Bot

tle

-Way

bee

r bot

tle, c

ompl

ete,

m

achi

ne-m

ade,

cro

wn

top

finis

h, b

asal

stip

plin

g,

embo

ssed

“

(sta

r)

(inte

rlock

ing

GC

logo

) 7 /

8 / 4

801

/ 1 –

WA

Y”

on

base

Uni

ted

Stat

es 1

957

36

T-15

; Str.

Ic,

20-4

1 cm

bs

Gla

ss

Bot

tle

-Way

bee

r bot

tle, o

ne b

ase,

thre

e bo

dy, a

nd o

ne sh

ould

er to

fini

sh fr

agm

ent,

mac

hine

-m

ade,

cro

wn

top

finis

h, b

asal

stip

plin

g, e

mbo

ssed

“S

(inte

rlock

ing

GC

logo

) 7 /

20 /

4801

/ 1

– W

AY

” on

ba

se

Uni

ted

Stat

es 1

957

37

T-3;

Str.

Id

Gla

ss

Bot

tle

Am

ber g

lass

bee

r or s

oda

bottl

e, m

achi

ne-m

ade,

sh

ould

er to

nec

k fr

agm

ent

Unk

now

n Po

st-1

908

38

T-3;

Str.

Id

Gla

ss

Bot

tle

Am

ber g

lass

bev

erag

e bo

ttle

body

frag

men

t U

nkno

wn

Unk

now

n

39

T-3;

Str.

Id

Met

al

Nai

l W

ire n

ail,

com

plet

e, ro

und

head

, rou

nd sh

aft,

cons

iste

ntly

shap

ed sh

ank,

poi

nted

nai

l end

U

nite

d St

ates

Pos

t-189

4

40

T-2;

Str.

Ii

Gla

ss

Bot

tle

Dar

k ol

ive-

gree

n gi

n bo

ttle,

shou

lder

to fi

nish

fr

agm

ent,

appl

ied

oil f

inis

h U

nkno

wn

ca. 1

850-

1885

41

T-

2; S

tr. Ii

G

lass

B

ottle

A

mbe

r gla

ss b

ottle

bod

y fr

agm

ent

Unk

now

n U

nkno

wn

Cultu

ral S

urve

ys H

awai

‘i Jo

b Co

de: W

AIK

IKI 2

49

Re

sults

of L

abor

ator

y A

naly

sis

AIS

R fo

r the

TMK

s: [1

] 2-3

-018

:052

–060

, 074

, 075

, and

077

16

1

Pr

oven

ienc

e M

ater

ial

Typ

e D

escr

iptio

n O

rigi

n A

ge

42

T-2;

Str.

Ii

Gla

ss

Bot

tle

Aqu

a St

ar S

oda

Wat

er W

orks

, sod

a bo

ttle,

one

bas

e to

bo

dy a

nd o

ne b

ody

to sh

ould

er fr

agm

ent,

sem

i-rou

nd

base

, tw

o-pi

ece

cup-

botto

m m

old,

em

boss

ed “

[S]T

AR

Uni

ted

Stat

es c

a. 1

900

43

T-2;

Str.

Ii

Cer

amic

H

ollo

ww

are

Porc

elai

n, h

ollo

ww

are,

stra

ight

-sid

ed c

up, t

wo

body

to

rim

frag

men

ts, b

lue

flora

l geo

met

ric h

and-

pain

ted

mot

if ar

ound

rim

, low

er b

ody

relie

f mol

ded

with

w

inte

r gre

en g

laze

Japa

n Po

st-1

868

44

T-2;

Str.

Ii

Cer

amic

H

ollo

ww

are

Porc

elai

n, h

ollo

ww

are,

stra

ight

-sid

ed c

up, b

ody

frag

men

t, bl

ack

and

pink

han

d-pa

inte

d flo

ral m

otif

Japa

n Po

st-1

868

45

T-2;

Str.

Ii

Cer

amic

H

ollo

ww

are

Porc

elai

n, h

ollo

ww

are,

bod

y fr

agm

ent,

blue

han

d-pa

inte

d ge

omet

ric m

otif

Japa

n Po

st-1

868

46

T-2;

Str.

Ii

Cer

amic

H

ollo

ww

are

Porc

elai

n, h

ollo

ww

are,

blu

e ha

nd-p

aint

ed fl

oral

mot

if Ja

pan

Post

-186

8

47

T-2;

Str.

Ii

Cer

amic

H

ollo

ww

are

Yel

low

war

e, b

ody

frag

men

t, bu

ff p

aste

, tra

nspa

rent

gl

aze,

ann

ular

slip

war

e, e

ngin

e-tu

rned

blu

e an

d w

hite

ba

nds

Euro

-A

mer

ica

ca. 1

840-

1930

48

T-2;

Str.

Ii

Cer

amic

B

utto

n Po

rcel

ain

butto

n, P

ross

er m

olde

d, o

ne p

iece

, rou

nd,

two

eyes

, sew

-thro

ugh,

no

deco

ratio

n U

nite

d St

ates

184

0-19

62

49

T-2;

Str.

Ii

Gla

ss

Mar

ble

Gla

ss m

arbl

e, h

andm

ade,

tran

sitio

nal,

opaq

ue, o

ne

roug

h po

ntil

mar

k, sw

irlin

g w

hite

and

pur

ple

glas

s U

nite

d St

ates

189

6-19

01

50

T-2;

Str.

Ii

Cer

amic

H

ollo

ww

are

Ston

ewar

e, sh

ould

ered

food

jar l

id, s

mal

l, un

glaz

ed,

dist

inct

inw

ard

beve

l on

edge

s C

hina

U

nkno

wn

Cultu

ral S

urve

ys H

awai

‘i Jo

b Co

de: W

AIK

IKI 2

49

Re

sults

of L

abor

ator

y A

naly

sis

AIS

R fo

r the

TMK

s: [1

] 2-3

-018

:052

–060

, 074

, 075

, and

077

16

2

Pr

oven

ienc

e M

ater

ial

Typ

e D

escr

iptio

n O

rigi

n A

ge

51

T-2;

Str.

Ii

Gla

ss

Bot

tle

Pale

gre

enis

h aq

ua H

onol

ulu

Soda

Wat

er C

ompa

ny

bottl

e, c

ompl

ete,

four

-pie

ce m

old,

flat

bas

e, to

oled

cr

own

top

finis

h, 1

0 oz

. cap

acity

, em

boss

ed

“”

verti

cally

on

body

on

heel

, and

Mal

tese

Cro

ss o

n ba

se

Uni

ted

Stat

es c

a. 1

914

52

T-2;

Str.

Ii

Gla

ss

Bot

tle

Aqu

a so

da b

ottle

, man

ufac

ture

d by

Cod

d, H

iram

, &

Com

pany

, bot

tled

by G

over

’s B

ottli

ng E

mpo

rium

in

New

Roc

helle

, NY

, bas

e to

nec

k fr

agm

ent,

mol

d-bl

own

(two

piec

e), C

odd’

s bal

l sto

pper

bot

tle st

yle,

S

hee

l, an

d “E

.G.”

on

base

Uni

ted

Stat

es 1

873-

mid

-19

10s

53

T-16

; Str.

Ic;

60-1

00 c

mbs

G

lass

Ja

r -

CA

pla

nt,

base

to h

eel f

ragm

ent,

embo

ssed

“20

(Dia

mon

d-lo

go) 8

/ 11

/ 375

7-C

” on

bas

e

Uni

ted

Stat

es 1

938

54

T-16

; Str.

Ic;

60-1

00 c

mbs

G

lass

B

ottle

A

mbe

r bee

r bot

tle, e

xpor

t sty

le, m

anuf

actu

red

by A

. &

D. H

. Cha

mbe

rs o

f Pitt

sbur

gh, P

A, b

ase

to p

artia

l fin

ish

frag

men

t, tw

o-pi

ece

post

-bot

tom

mol

d, a

pplie

d do

uble

oil

finis

h, e

mbo

ssed

“A

. & D

. H. C

. / 7

” on

ba

se

Uni

ted

Stat

es c

a.

1870

s/18

80s

55

T-16

; Str.

Ic;

60-1

00 c

mbs

G

lass

B

ottle

D

ark

oliv

e am

ber w

ine

or li

quor

bot

tle, b

ase

to b

ody

frag

men

t, tu

rn m

old,

bas

e fo

rmed

with

sepa

rate

bas

e m

old,

mam

elon

pre

sent

Unk

now

n 18

80-1

915

Cultu

ral S

urve

ys H

awai

‘i Jo

b Co

de: W

AIK

IKI 2

49

Re

sults

of L

abor

ator

y A

naly

sis

AIS

R fo

r the

TMK

s: [1

] 2-3

-018

:052

–060

, 074

, 075

, and

077

16

3

Pr

oven

ienc

e M

ater

ial

Typ

e D

escr

iptio

n O

rigi

n A

ge

56

T-16

; Str.

Ic;

60-1

00 c

mbs

G

lass

B

ottle

A

qua

bottl

e (c

ould

hav

e be

en u

sed

for m

iner

al w

ater

, so

da, a

le/p

orte

r, m

edic

ine,

win

e/liq

uor,

or b

ulk

ink)

, on

e he

el to

bod

y, o

ne b

ody,

and

one

nec

k to

fini

sh

frag

men

t, m

old

blow

n (u

nkno

wn

mol

d ty

pe),

appl

ied

min

eral

fini

sh

Unk

now

n 18

40s-

1880

s

57

T-16

; Str.

Ic;

60-1

00 c

mbs

G

lass

Pr

esse

d C

olor

less

pre

ssed

gla

ss, t

umbl

er, b

ase

to b

ody

frag

men

t U

nkno

wn

Post

-187

0

58

T-16

; Str.

Ic;

60-1

00 c

mbs

G

lass

B

ottle

C

olor

less

dru

ggis

t or p

resc

riptio

n bo

ttle,

nec

k to

fin

ish

frag

men

t, m

old

blow

n (u

nkno

wn

mol

d ty

pe),

pres

crip

tion

finis

h

Unk

now

n M

id-1

870s

-ea

rly 1

920s

59

T-16

; Str.

Ic;

60-1

00 c

mbs

G

lass

B

ottle

Unk

now

n U

nkno

wn

60

T-16

; Str.

Ic;

60-1

00 c

mbs

G

lass

B

ottle

A

mbe

r Anc

hor H

ocki

ng G

lass

Cor

p. b

eer b

ottle

, m

anuf

actu

red

at th

e C

onne

llsvi

lle, P

A p

lant

, bas

e fr

agm

ent,

mac

hine

-mad

e, b

asal

stip

plin

g, e

mbo

ssed

“6

1-38

/ 5

(Anc

hor-

H tr

adem

ark)

52

/ 282

”

Uni

ted

Stat

es 1

952

61

T-16

; Str.

Ic;

60-1

00 c

mbs

C

eram

ic

Flat

war

e Ea

rthen

war

e w

ith e

dge

deco

ratio

n, w

hite

war

e,

flatw

are,

pla

te, b

ase

to ri

m fr

agm

ent,

unsc

allo

ped

rim

with

impr

esse

d m

oldi

ng in

sim

ple

patte

rn, p

aint

ed

unde

r the

gla

ze in

blu

e

Euro

-A

mer

ica

1840

s-18

60s

62

T-16

; Str.

Ic;

60-1

00 c

mbs

M

etal

N

ail

Nai

l, co

mpl

ete,

mac

hine

-mad

e, c

orro

ded

head

, po

inte

d na

il en

d U

nite

d St

ates

Pos

t-189

4

63

T-16

; Str.

Ic;

60-1

00 c

mbs

G

lass

Ja

r T.

T. P

ond

Com

pany

milk

gla

ss c

osm

etic

s jar

, bod

y to

fin

ish

frag

men

t, sq

uare

shap

e, m

achi

ne-m

ade,

co

ntin

uous

ext

erna

l thr

ead

finis

h, e

mbo

ssed

[D

S]”

verti

cally

on

side

pan

els

Uni

ted

Stat

es P

ost-1

910s

64

T-16

; Str.

Ic;

60-1

00 c

mbs

C

eram

ic

Hol

low

war

e W

hite

war

e, h

ollo

ww

are,

bow

l, ba

se to

bod

y fr

agm

ent,

no d

ecor

atio

n Eu

ro-

Am

eric

a 18

20-1

890

Cultu

ral S

urve

ys H

awai

‘i Jo

b Co

de: W

AIK

IKI 2

49

Re

sults

of L

abor

ator

y A

naly

sis

AIS

R fo

r the

TMK

s: [1

] 2-3

-018

:052

–060

, 074

, 075

, and

077

16

4

Pr

oven

ienc

e M

ater

ial

Typ

e D

escr

iptio

n O

rigi

n A

ge

65

T-16

; Str.

Ic;

60-1

00 c

mbs

C

eram

ic

Hol

low

war

e Ea

rthen

war

e, w

hite

war

e, h

ollo

ww

are,

bod

y fr

agm

ent,

unde

rgla

ze m

ulbe

rry

trans

fer p

rinte

d pa

ttern

Eu

ro-

Am

eric

a 18

29-1

867

66

T-16

; Str.

Ic;

60-1

00 c

mbs

C

eram

ic

Hol

low

war

e St

onew

are,

hol

low

war

e, ja

r fra

gmen

t, gr

een

glaz

ed

with

yel

low

rim

C

hina

U

nkno

wn

67

T-16

; Str.

Ic;

60-1

00 c

mbs

C

eram

ic

Hol

low

war

e Po

rcel

ain,

hol

low

war

e, sm

all d

ish,

ove

rgla

ze re

d ha

nd-p

aint

ed b

and

inte

rior r

im

Asi

a Po

st-1

852

68

T-16

; Str.

Ic;

60-1

00 c

mbs

C

eram

ic

Flat

war

e Po

rcel

ain,

flat

war

e, p

late

, blu

e ha

nd-p

aint

ed b

orde

r pa

ttern

and

land

scap

e de

sign

feat

urin

g bu

ildin

g or

pa

vilio

n, b

ridge

, and

will

ow tr

ees

Chi

na

Post

-185

2

69

T-16

; Str.

Ic;

60-1

00 c

mbs

C

eram

ic

Mar

ble

Earth

enw

are

“cla

y” m

arbl

e, m

achi

ne-m

ade,

tan

colo

r Eu

ro-

Am

eric

a 18

59-1

930s

70

T-16

; Str.

Ic;

60-1

00 c

mbs

Com

posi

te

Com

posi

te, f

ragm

ent,

shap

ed, u

nkno

wn

func

tion

Unk

now

n U

nkno

wn

71

T-19

; Str.

Ic

Gla

ss

Bot

tle

Col

orle

ss g

lass

bot

tle b

ase

frag

men

t U

nkno

wn

Unk

now

n

72

T-1;

Str.

Id;

30 c

mbs

G

lass

Ja

r T.

T. P

ond

Com

pany

milk

gla

ss c

osm

etic

s jar

, bod

y to

fin

ish

frag

men

t, sq

uare

shap

e, m

achi

ne-m

ade,

co

ntin

uous

ext

erna

l thr

ead

finis

h, e

mbo

ssed

v

ertic

ally

on

side

pan

el

Uni

ted

Stat

es P

ost-1

910s

73

T-1;

Str.

Id;

30 c

mbs

C

eram

ic

Flat

war

e Po

rcel

ain,

flat

war

e, p

late

, Gei

sha

Girl

war

e, b

lue

unde

rgla

ze p

agod

a, re

d, b

lack

, gre

en, a

nd g

old

over

glaz

e, g

old

gilt

arou

nd ri

m

Japa

n 18

75-1

950s

74

T-1;

Str.

Id;

30 c

mbs

C

eram

ic

Hol

low

war

e Po

rcel

ain,

hol

low

war

e, b

owl,

gree

n an

d pi

nk

unde

rgla

ze, c

ombi

natio

n of

tran

sfer

-prin

t and

han

d-pa

inte

d, fl

oral

mot

if

Japa

n Po

st-1

888

Cultu

ral S

urve

ys H

awai

‘i Jo

b Co

de: W

AIK

IKI 2

49

Re

sults

of L

abor

ator

y A

naly

sis

AIS

R fo

r the

TMK

s: [1

] 2-3

-018

:052

–060

, 074

, 075

, and

077

16

5

Pr

oven

ienc

e M

ater

ial

Typ

e D

escr

iptio

n O

rigi

n A

ge

75

T-1;

Str.

Id;

30 c

mbs

C

eram

ic

Hol

low

war

e D

ippe

d ea

rthen

war

e, h

ollo

ww

are,

bod

y fr

agm

ent,

band

ed “

annu

lar”

war

e, c

obal

t blu

e U

nite

d St

ates

177

0s-e

arly

tw

entie

th

cent

ury

76

T-1;

Str.

Id;

30 c

mbs

C

eram

ic

Toile

twar

e St

onew

are,

toile

twar

e, c

ham

ber p

ot, b

ody,

lid,

and

ha

ndle

frag

men

ts

Euro

-A

mer

ica

Unk

now

n

77

T-1;

Str.

Id;

30 c

mbs

M

etal

N

ail

Wire

nai

l, co

mpl

ete,

roun

d he

ad, r

ound

shaf

t, co

nsis

tent

ly sh

aped

shan

k, p

oint

ed n

ail e

nd

Uni

ted

Stat

es P

ost-1

894

78

T-1;

Str.

Id;

30 c

mbs

M

etal

N

ail

Wire

nai

l, co

mpl

ete,

roun

d he

ad, r

ound

shaf

t, co

nsis

tent

ly sh

aped

shan

k, p

oint

ed n

ail e

nd

Uni

ted

Stat

es P

ost-1

894

79

T-1;

Str.

Id;

30 c

mbs

M

etal

N

ail

Wire

nai

l, co

mpl

ete,

hea

vily

cor

rode

d, ro

und

head

, ro

und

shaf

t, co

nsis

tent

ly sh

aped

shan

k, p

oint

ed n

ail

end

Uni

ted

Stat

es P

ost-1

894

80

T-1;

Str.

Id;

30 c

mbs

M

etal

N

ail

Wire

nai

l, sh

ank

to e

nd fr

agm

ent,

cons

iste

ntly

shap

ed

shan

k, p

oint

ed n

ail e

nd

Uni

ted

Stat

es P

ost-1

894

81

T-1;

Str.

Id;

30 c

mbs

M

etal

H

ouse

hold

C

artri

dge

fuse

, met

al, p

lug

type

U

nite

d St

ates

Pre

-196

0

82

T-1;

Str.

Id;

30 c

mbs

Pl

astic

C

onst

ruct

ion

Bak

elite

, con

stru

ctio

n, p

roba

bly

used

for i

nsul

atio

n U

nite

d St

ates

Pos

t-190

2

83

T-1;

Str.

Id;

30 c

mbs

G

lass

B

ottle

C

olor

less

hom

eopa

thic

via

l/bot

tle, m

achi

ne-m

ade,

“s

hort”

styl

e, o

ne b

ase

to b

ody

and

five

body

fr

agm

ents

Uni

ted

Stat

es 1

920s

-194

0s

84

T-7;

Str.

Ie;

80 c

mbs

C

eram

ic

Flat

war

e Po

rcel

ain,

hol

low

war

e, te

apot

, bod

y fr

agm

ent,

exte

rior b

row

n gl

aze,

inte

rior d

ecor

ated

in h

and-

pain

ted

unde

rgla

ze b

lue

Chi

na

Post

-185

2

85

T-18

; Str.

IIa

Cer

amic

H

ollo

ww

are

Porc

elai

n, h

ollo

ww

are,

rice

bow

l, ha

nd-p

aint

ed g

reen

an

d bl

ue u

nder

glaz

e pl

um o

r che

rry

blos

som

tree

, ha

nd-p

aint

ed b

lue

unde

rgla

ze b

and

arou

nd b

ase

rim

Japa

n Po

st-1

868

Cultu

ral S

urve

ys H

awai

‘i Jo

b Co

de: W

AIK

IKI 2

49

Re

sults

of L

abor

ator

y A

naly

sis

AIS

R fo

r the

TMK

s: [1

] 2-3

-018

:052

–060

, 074

, 075

, and

077

16

6

Pr

oven

ienc

e M

ater

ial

Typ

e D

escr

iptio

n O

rigi

n A

ge

86

T-18

; Str.

IIa

Gla

ss

Bot

tle

Col

orle

ss g

lass

bot

tle, b

ase

frag

men

t, m

anuf

actu

red

-Illi

nois

Gla

ss C

o. a

t the

Alto

n, IL

pla

nt,

mac

hine

-mad

e, v

alve

mar

k, st

ippl

ed b

ase,

bas

e em

boss

ed “

7 (D

iam

ond-

”

Uni

ted

Stat

es 1

940-

1983

87

T-15

; Str.

Id

Cer

amic

H

ouse

hold

W

hite

pas

te, t

rans

pare

nt g

laze

, pos

sibl

e ho

useh

old

coun

terto

p or

floo

r fra

gmen

t U

nkno

wn

Unk

now

n

88

T-15

; Str.

Id

Rub

ber

Unk

now

n R

ubbe

r, bl

ack,

hol

low

hem

isph

ere,

unk

now

n fu

nctio

n U

nite

d St

ates

Pos

t-184

4

89

T-15

; Str.

Ie

Gla

ss

Bot

tle

Col

orle

ss m

ilk b

ottle

, mac

hine

-mad

e, o

ne b

ase

to

body

, one

bod

y to

shou

lder

, and

one

nec

k to

fini

sh

frag

men

t, m

anuf

actu

red

by Il

linoi

s Pac

ific

Gla

ss

Cor

p. a

nd b

ottle

d by

Hon

olul

u D

airy

men

’s A

ssoc

., bo

dy e

mbo

ssed

“

Dai

ry[m

e]n’

s / [A

]sso

ci[a

]tion

”, h

eel e

mbo

ssed

“[

HA

LF] P

INT

// [(

PG in

a tr

iang

le m

aker

’s m

ark)

’, an

d ba

se e

mbo

ssed

“H

D”

with

“52

” in

side

val

ve

mar

k

Uni

ted

Stat

es 1

925-

1931

90

T-15

; Str.

Ie

Gla

ss

Bot

tle

Col

orle

ss sh

oe p

olis

h co

ntai

ner,

com

plet

e, m

achi

ne-

mad

e, m

anuf

actu

red

by T

hree

Riv

ers G

lass

Co.

in

Texa

s, o

n ba

se

Uni

ted

Stat

es 1

922-

1937

91

T-15

; Str.

Ie

Gla

ss

Bot

tle

Col

orle

ss li

kely

hai

r dye

bot

tle, c

ompl

ete,

mac

hine

-m

ade,

roun

d ba

se, o

il fin

ish,

em

boss

ed w

ith Ja

pane

se

char

acte

rs o

n bo

dy th

at tr

ansl

ates

to “

ten

thou

sand

ry

ou //

set a

mou

nt li

ne”

and

“MA

DE

IN JA

PAN

” on

he

el, w

ritin

g re

ads r

ight

to le

ft so

bot

tle d

ates

pre

-W

WII

Japa

n 19

21-1

942

Cultu

ral S

urve

ys H

awai

‘i Jo

b Co

de: W

AIK

IKI 2

49

Re

sults

of L

abor

ator

y A

naly

sis

AIS

R fo

r the

TMK

s: [1

] 2-3

-018

:052

–060

, 074

, 075

, and

077

16

7

Pr

oven

ienc

e M

ater

ial

Typ

e D

escr

iptio

n O

rigi

n A

ge

92

T-15

; Str.

Ie

Gla

ss

Bot

tle

Col

orle

ss, h

ouse

hold

bot

tle, c

ompl

ete,

mac

hine

-mad

e,

smal

l mou

th c

ontin

uous

ext

erna

l thr

ead

finis

h,

base

, bas

e em

boss

ed “

G H

/ 4.

”

Uni

ted

Stat

es P

ost-1

920

93

T-15

; Str.

Ie

Gla

ss

Mod

ern

Gre

en, m

oder

n, h

ouse

hold

, mac

hine

-mad

e U

nite

d St

ates

Pos

t-191

0s

94

T-15

; Str.

Ie

Gla

ss

Bot

tle

Col

orle

ss ja

r, m

achi

ne-m

ade,

two

base

to b

ody

frag

men

ts a

nd o

ne b

ody

frag

men

t, ba

se e

mbo

ssed

“8

– 93

13”

Uni

ted

Stat

es c

a. 1

940s

95

T-15

; Str.

Ie

Gla

ss

Jar

Cob

alt b

lue

med

icin

e ja

r, co

mpl

ete,

mac

hine

-mad

e,

larg

e-m

outh

on

base

enc

irclin

g tri

angl

e m

ark

Uni

ted

Stat

es P

ost-1

930s

-19

70s

96

T-15

; Str.

Ie

Gla

ss

Bot

tle

Col

orle

ss v

ial,

com

plet

e, m

achi

ne-m

ade,

rect

angu

lar

shap

e, sm

all m

outh

ext

erna

l thr

ead

finis

h U

nkno

wn

Post

-190

8

97

T-15

; Str.

Ie

Gla

ss

Bot

tle

Col

orle

ss b

ottle

, unk

now

n m

etho

d of

man

ufac

ture

, et

ched

“Q

UA

L...”

on

body

and

on h

eel

Uni

ted

Stat

es U

nkno

wn

98

T-15

; Str.

Ie

Gla

ss

Jar

Milk

gla

ss, o

intm

ent/c

ream

jar,

body

frag

men

t, un

know

n m

etho

d of

man

ufac

ture

U

nite

d St

ates

189

0s-m

id-

twen

tieth

ce

ntur

y 99

T-

15; S

tr. Ie

C

eram

ic

Hou

seho

ld

Earth

enw

are

hous

ehol

d fr

agm

ent,

relie

f mol

ded

Euro

-A

mer

ica

Unk

now

n

100

T-15

; Str.

Ie

Cer

amic

H

ollo

ww

are

Porc

elai

n, h

ollo

ww

are,

bow

l, ba

se fr

agm

ent,

blac

k an

d br

own

unde

rgla

ze h

and-

pain

ted

pine

s with

bro

wn

over

glaz

e de

tails

on

bran

ches

Japa

n Po

st-1

868

101

T-15

; Str.

Ie

Cer

amic

H

ollo

ww

are

Porc

elai

n, h

ollo

ww

are,

bow

l, bo

dy to

rim

frag

men

t, ha

nd-p

aint

ed g

reen

cro

ss h

atch

ing

Asi

a Po

st-1

852

Cultu

ral S

urve

ys H

awai

‘i Jo

b Co

de: W

AIK

IKI 2

49

Re

sults

of L

abor

ator

y A

naly

sis

AIS

R fo

r the

TMK

s: [1

] 2-3

-018

:052

–060

, 074

, 075

, and

077

16

8

Pr

oven

ienc

e M

ater

ial

Typ

e D

escr

iptio

n O

rigi

n A

ge

102

T-15

; Str.

Ie

Cer

amic

H

ollo

ww

are

Porc

elai

n, h

ollo

ww

are,

bow

l, co

balt

blue

han

d-pa

inte

d de

sign

A

sia

Post

-185

2

103

T-15

; Str.

Ie

Cer

amic

In

sula

tor

Porc

elai

n, w

all t

ube,

ung

laze

d U

nite

d St

ates

189

0-19

32

104

T-6;

Str.

Ig

Gla

ss

Jar

Milk

gla

ss, c

old

crea

m ja

r, on

e ba

se to

bod

y fr

agm

ent

and

one

base

to fi

nish

frag

men

t, m

achi

ne-m

ade,

ova

l sh

ape,

larg

e m

outh

ext

erna

l thr

ead

finis

h, g

eom

etric

de

sign

relie

f mol

ded

on b

ody;

em

boss

ed w

ith H

A

on

base

Uni

ted

Stat

es 1

890s

-mid

-tw

entie

th

cent

ury

105

T-6;

Str.

Ig

Cer

amic

H

ollo

ww

are

Porc

elai

n, h

ollo

ww

are,

rice

bow

l, on

e ba

se to

bod

y fr

agm

ent a

nd o

ne b

ody

frag

men

t, un

derg

laze

cob

alt

blue

han

d-pa

inte

d de

cora

tion,

“M

AD

E IN

JAPA

N”

stam

ped

on b

ase

Japa

n Po

st-1

921

106

T-6;

Str.

Ig

Gla

ss

Bot

tle

Med

ium

sapp

hire

blu

e bo

ttle,

nec

k to

fini

sh fr

agm

ent,

mac

hine

-mad

e, sm

all m

outh

ext

erna

l thr

ead

finis

h U

nite

d St

ates

Pos

t-193

0

107

T-6;

Str.

Ig

Gla

ss

Bot

tle

Col

orle

ss m

ilk b

ottle

, mac

hine

-mad

e, o

ne b

ody

frag

men

t and

one

nec

k to

fini

sh fr

agm

ent,

caps

eat

finis

h, b

ottle

d by

Hon

olul

u D

airy

men

’s A

ssoc

., bo

dy

Uni

ted

Stat

es P

re-1

959

108

T-6;

Str.

Ig

Gla

ss

Bot

tle

-Ill

inoi

s Gla

ss C

ompa

ny, o

ne b

ody

to sh

ould

er

frag

men

t, on

e bo

dy fr

agm

ent,

and

one

base

to b

ody

frag

men

t, m

achi

ne-m

ade,

bas

al st

ippl

ing,

text

ure

on

body

, bas

e em

boss

ed “

4 (D

iam

ond-

Uni

ted

Stat

es 1

944

109

T-6;

Str.

Ig

Cer

amic

H

ollo

ww

are

Porc

elai

n, h

ollo

ww

are,

tea-

bow

l, ba

se to

rim

fr

agm

ent,

“JA

PAN

” st

ampe

d on

bas

e Ja

pan

Post

-192

1

Cultu

ral S

urve

ys H

awai

‘i Jo

b Co

de: W

AIK

IKI 2

49

Re

sults

of L

abor

ator

y A

naly

sis

AIS

R fo

r the

TMK

s: [1

] 2-3

-018

:052

–060

, 074

, 075

, and

077

16

9

Pr

oven

ienc

e M

ater

ial

Typ

e D

escr

iptio

n O

rigi

n A

ge

110

T-6;

Str.

Ig

Cer

amic

H

ollo

ww

are

Porc

elai

n, h

ollo

ww

are,

jar,

body

to ri

m fr

agm

ent,

Win

ter G

reen

with

und

ergl

aze

blue

han

d-pa

inte

d flo

ral d

esig

n an

d gr

een

band

s

Japa

n Po

st-1

868

111

T-6;

Str.

Ig

Cer

amic

H

ollo

ww

are

Porc

elai

n, h

ollo

ww

are,

teac

up, b

ody

to h

andl

e fr

agm

ent,

no d

ecor

atio

n Eu

ro-

Am

eric

a 18

25-p

rese

nt

112

T-6;

Str.

Ig

Cer

amic

In

sula

tor

Porc

elai

n in

sula

tor,

whi

te, d

ry p

ress

ed p

roce

ss,

, man

ufac

ture

d by

Illin

ois

Elec

tric

Porc

elai

n C

ompa

ny in

Mac

omb,

Illin

ois

Uni

ted

Stat

es 1

910-

1915

113

T-6;

Str.

Ig

Cer

amic

H

ollo

ww

are

Earth

enw

are,

hol

low

war

e, d

ish,

bea

ded

rim w

ith

unde

rgla

ze re

d ha

nd-p

aint

ed b

and

belo

w a

nd

unde

rgla

ze g

reen

cut

spon

ge fl

oral

mot

if in

terio

r bod

y de

cora

tion

Euro

-A

mer

ica

1840

s-18

70s,

U.S

. re

viva

l 19

15-1

940

114

T-6;

Str.

Ig

Cer

amic

an

d m

etal

Sp

ark

plug

Tr

ansp

orta

tion

part,

spar

k pl

ug, m

etal

cor

e an

d ce

ram

ic e

xter

ior,

used

in c

ar g

as e

ngin

e, u

nder

glaz

e bl

ack

stam

ped

“AC

// 8

4” o

n ce

ram

ic p

ortio

n

Uni

ted

Stat

es P

ost-1

888

115

T-18

; Str.

Id

Gla

ss

Jar

Col

orle

ss ja

r, tw

o ne

ck to

fini

sh fr

agm

ents

, mac

hine

-m

ade,

larg

e m

outh

ext

erna

l thr

ead

finis

h U

nite

d St

ates

Pos

t-191

9

116

T-18

; Str.

Id

Cer

amic

H

ollo

ww

are

Porc

elai

n, h

ollo

ww

are,

jar,

body

to ri

m fr

agm

ent,

Win

ter G

reen

with

und

ergl

aze

blue

han

d-pa

inte

d de

cora

tion

Japa

n Po

st-1

868

117

T-19

; Str.

Id

Met

al

Nai

l W

ire n

ail,

com

plet

e, ro

und

head

, rou

nd sh

aft,

cons

iste

ntly

shap

ed sh

ank,

poi

nted

nai

l end

U

nite

d St

ates

Pos

t-189

4

118

T-19

; Str.

Id

Gla

ss

Bot

tle

Col

orle

ss g

lass

bot

tle b

ody

frag

men

t U

nkno

wn

Unk

now

n

119

T-19

; Str.

Id

Gla

ss

Bot

tle

Col

orle

ss g

lass

bot

tle b

ody

frag

men

t U

nkno

wn

Unk

now

n

Cultu

ral S

urve

ys H

awai

‘i Jo

b Co

de: W

AIK

IKI 2

49

Re

sults

of L

abor

ator

y A

naly

sis

AIS

R fo

r the

TMK

s: [1

] 2-3

-018

:052

–060

, 074

, 075

, and

077

17

0

Pr

oven

ienc

e M

ater

ial

Typ

e D

escr

iptio

n O

rigi

n A

ge

120

T-19

; Str.

Id

Gla

ss

Bot

tle

Aqu

a gl

ass b

ottle

bod

y fr

agm

ent

Unk

now

n U

nkno

wn

121

T-19

; Str.

Id

Cer

amic

H

ollo

ww

are

Whi

tew

are,

hol

low

war

e, b

ody

frag

men

t, no

de

cora

tion

Euro

-A

mer

ica

1820

-189

0

122

T-19

; Str.

Id

Woo

d M

illed

M

illed

woo

d fr

agm

ent

Unk

now

n U

nkno

wn

123

T-19

; Str.

Id

Cer

amic

D

oork

nob

Cer

amic

doo

r kno

b, m

ost l

ikel

y dr

awer

pul

l, re

lief

mol

ded

flora

l dec

orat

ion,

dar

k br

own

glaz

e U

nite

d St

ates

184

9-19

20s

124

T-9;

Str.

II;

91 c

mbs

M

etal

N

ail

Wire

nai

l, co

mpl

ete,

roun

d he

ad, r

ound

shaf

t, co

nsis

tent

ly sh

aped

shan

k, p

oint

ed n

ail e

nd

Uni

ted

Stat

es P

ost-1

894

125

T-4;

Str.

If;

61 c

mbs

M

ica

Fuse

win

dow

Mic

a w

indo

w fo

r fus

e U

nite

d St

ates

Pos

t-192

0

126

T-4;

Str.

If;

61 c

mbs

M

ica

Fuse

win

dow

Mic

a w

indo

w fo

r fus

e U

nite

d St

ates

Pos

t-192

0

127

T-4;

Str.

If;

61 c

mbs

G

lass

B

ottle

D

ark

oliv

e-gr

een

glas

s bot

tle b

ody

frag

men

t U

nkno

wn

Unk

now

n

128

T-4;

Str.

If;

61 c

mbs

Pl

astic

and

m

etal

Fu

se

Plas

tic a

nd m

etal

, pla

stic

plu

g fu

se, t

op g

lass

win

dow

(m

issi

ng),

and

“S”

type

reje

ctio

n ba

se w

ith b

rass

co

ntac

t poi

nt

Uni

ted

Stat

es P

ost-1

940

129

T-4;

Str.

If;

61 c

mbs

M

etal

N

ail

Wire

nai

l, sh

ank

to p

oint

frag

men

t, be

nt, c

orro

ded

Uni

ted

Stat

es P

ost-1

894

130

T-4;

Str.

If;

61 c

mbs

M

etal

N

ail

Wire

nai

l, sh

ank

to p

oint

frag

men

t, be

nt, c

orro

ded

Uni

ted

Stat

es P

ost-1

894

131

T-5;

Str.

II;

Fea.

3; 8

0 cm

bs

Bon

e B

utto

n B

one,

cut

/car

ved,

1 p

iece

, rou

nd, t

wo

eyes

, poo

r co

nditi

on

Uni

ted

Stat

es P

re-1

935

Cultu

ral S

urve

ys H

awai

‘i Jo

b Co

de: W

AIK

IKI 2

49

Re

sults

of L

abor

ator

y A

naly

sis

AIS

R fo

r the

TMK

s: [1

] 2-3

-018

:052

–060

, 074

, 075

, and

077

17

1

Pr

oven

ienc

e M

ater

ial

Typ

e D

escr

iptio

n O

rigi

n A

ge

132

T-6;

Str.

Ie

Shel

l B

utto

n M

othe

r of p

earl

butto

n fr

agm

ents

U

nite

d St

ates

Pre

-193

5

133

T-10

; Str.

If;

105-

110

cmbs

Woo

d M

illed

M

illed

woo

d fr

agm

ents

U

nkno

wn

Unk

now

n


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 172

The final step in the production of a mold-blown bottle is finishing the lip. The method used to finish the bottle is useful in artifact dating. Applied finishes were used from 1840 to 1885. Glass was applied to the bottle neck and the finish was shaped with a specialized lipping tool. Diagnostic features of an applied finish include side mold seams that end abruptly on the neck at the bottom of the finish, excess glass slopping over onto the upper neck below the finish, and a horizontal ridge inside the neck of the bottle that can be felt by inserting a finger into the bottle bore (BLM/SHA 2018).

Tooled finishes were used as early as the 1860s on smaller bottles, but it did not become the dominant finishing method until 1890. The full date range for a tooled finish is 1870-1920. The upper part of the bottle was re-fired and some of the glass from the neck was formed into the finish with a lipping tool. Diagnostic features of a tooled finish include side mold seams that fade out on the neck of the bottle below the finish, concentric horizontal tooling marks present on the finish and upper neck, an absence of glass flopping over onto the upper neck, and an absence of the interior ridge in the bore (BLM/SHA 2018).

5.1.1.1.2 Two- -1915) The most common type of mold is the two-piece mold, which dates from 1850 to 1920 but is

most common from 1880 to 1915. There are four variations of the two-piece mold: hinge, key, post-bottom, and cup-bottom.

The two-piece post-bottom mold was used between 1850 and 1890. This type of mold leaves two vertical side seams extending up the heel, body, and neck of the bottle from a circle seam on the center of the base. There is one bottle with a two-piece post-bottom mold in the collection. Acc. # 54 is an amber beer bottle made by A. & D.H. Chambers of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (Figure 99). The company was started in 1843 by two brothers, Alexander and David H. Chambers.

opened called Pittsburgh Glass Works. Beer bottles began being manufactured in the 1870s and 1880s. The bases were embossed with “A & D H C”.

The two-piece cup-bottom mold dates post-1850, with peak use from 1880 through the 1910s. This mold leaves a horizontal seam around the heel of the bottle and two side seams extending from the heel seam up the bottle body and neck. There are three bottles with a two-piece cup-bottom mold in the collection (Acc. #s 6, 42, 52). These bottles are described in detail below.

Acc. # 6 is a monosodium glutamate bottle made by Japanese food and chemical corporation Ajinomoto, named after the original product “essence of taste” or “ ” (Figure 100). The company was founded in 1907 by Saburosuke Suzuki II at the request of Dr. Kikunae Ikeda, the professor at Tokyo Imperial University who invented the method of producing monosodium glutamate seasoning. Patents were acquired in Japan in 1908, France in 1909, and the United States in 1912. Mass production of Ajinomoto began in 1909 following tests at Tokyo Sanitation Laboratory of the Ministry of the Interior in 1908, which showed the product was safe for consumption. Today, the corporation produces seasonings, cooking oils, frozen foods, beverages, sweeteners, amino acids, and pharmaceuticals.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 173

Figure 99. Acc. # 54, amber beer bottle, export style, manufactured by A. & D.H. Chambers of

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, base to partial finish fragment, two-piece post-bottom mold, applied double oil finish, embossed “A. & D. H. C. / 7” on base

Figure 100. Acc. # 6, colorless Ajinomoto bottle, mold-blown, two-piece cup-bottom, tooled

patent finish, base embossed with “essence of taste” characters,


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 174

Acc. # 42 is a Star Soda Water Works bottle (Figure 101). It dates ca. 1900.

Acc. # 52 is a Codd-neck bottle (Figure 102). The Codd’s ball stopper bottle style was invented by Hiram Codd in England during the second half of the nineteenth century. The idea was patented in England in 1870-1872 (numbers 3070, 2212, and 2621) and the United States in 1872-1873 and 1878 (numbers 129652, 138230, and 8372). Carbonation held the marble against the rubber washer in the upper ring of the neck of the bottle creating a seal (Munsey 2010). This style of bottle was popular in England, Canada, India, and Australia. However, Codd neck bottles were only made at one glass factory in the United States. The Whitney Glass Company in Glassboro, New Jersey started making Codd neck bottles in 1886. Reportedly, Codd neck bottles were not as popular in the United States because kids would break the bottles to get at the marbles. The Hutchinson spring stopper and crown closure were used more to seal soda water (BLM/SHA 2018_Codd Style). Acc. # 52 was manufactured by Codd, Hiram, & Company in England and bottled by Gover’s Bottling Emporium in New Rochelle, New York. The date for Codd neck bottles in the United States is 1873 to the mid-1910s.

5.1.1.1.3 Four- -mid 1910s) Another type of mold-blown bottle in the collection was made using a four-piece mold. A four-

piece mold has four main body parts, two for the body and two for the shoulder/neck. This type of mold has a horizontal seam on or just below the shoulder and two side mold seams running vertically from the heel, up the body, to the neck of the bottle. Four-piece molds also have a fifth part, the base plate that can be either “post-bottom” or “cup-bottom.” Four-piece molds have been called “sectional plate molds” because the parts can be changed to add or remove embossing without creating a new mold. Four-piece molds were commonly used for liquor, beer, and soda bottles between the early 1880s and mid-1910s (BLM/SHA 2018). Acc. # 51 is made with a four-piece cup-bottom mold and dates to ca. 1914 (Figure 103).

5.1.1.1.4 Turn mold (1870-1920) Turn mold bottles date from 1870 to 1920. They were made by turning the bottles inside the

mold, which left the body of the bottles seamless and shiny. Unlike free-blown bottles, turn mold bottles are symmetrical and evenly proportioned. They can be identified by faint concentric rings around the body, shoulder, and neck of the bottle. Most do not have marking or embossing because it required the use of a secondary mold plate before the bottled had cooled and solidified. The bases are round and have a slightly indented or deeply indented “push-up” or “kick-up.” A common feature on turn-mold bottles is a mamelon or “dot” in the center of the base, possibly from an air venting hole. Turn molded bottles are often used for wine or liquor. There is one turn mold bottle in the collection, Acc. # 55 (Figure 104).

5.1.1.1.5 Acc. #s 56 and 58 are mold-blown, but the fragments do not have the diagnostic features

necessary to determine mold type (Figure 105). The double oil finish on Acc. # 56 was common from the 1840s to 1870s. It was used on a wide variety of bottle types including mineral water, soda, ale/porter, wine, and bulk ink. The prescription finish on Acc. # 58 was used between the mid-1870s and early 1920s. It is most often seen on druggist or prescription bottles, but also found on medicinal/bitters, poison, ink, perfume/cologne, and toiletry products during the same period.

There are a few examples of prescription finishes on liquor bottles/flasks and food or sauce bottles as well.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 175

Figure 101. Acc. # 42, aqua Star Soda Water Works, soda bottle, one base to body and one body

to shoulder fragment, semi-round base, two-piece cup-bottom mold, embossed “ ”

Figure 102. Acc. # 52, aqua soda bottle, manufactured by Codd, Hiram, & Company, bottled by

Gover’s Bottling Emporium in New Rochelle, New York, base to neck fragment, mold-blown (two piece), Codd’s ball S /

S PATENT / PAT. APRIL 29TH 1873 / S

on base


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 176

Figure 103. Acc. # 51, pale greenish aqua Honolulu Soda Water Company bottle, complete, four-

piece mold, flat base, tooled crown top finish, 10 oz. capacity, embossed “

on heel, and Maltese Cross on base

Figure 104. Acc. # 55, dark olive amber wine or liquor bottle, base to body fragment, turn mold,

base with mamelon


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 177

Figure 105. 1) Acc. # 56, applied mineral finish; 2) Acc. # 58, prescription finish

5.1.1.2 Machine-made bottles (post-1905)

Semi-automatic machines were introduced in the 1890s and at first were mostly used to make wide-mouth bottles/jars. The glass had to be manually fed into the machines by glass workers. In

illed glass workers. The machine could blow wide-mouth bottles as early as 1905 and narrow-necked bottles (such as beverage bottles) as early as 1908. The Automatic Bottle Machine (ABM) blew a bottle from base to lip, usually with a two-piece cup-bottom mold. The two side seams extend to and over the lip of the bottle, or to a horizontal seam at the bottom of the bottle finish. The base of a bottle made in the early ways, other thby a semi versus fully automatic machine, so both types of bottles are described in this report as “machine made” (BLM/SHA 2018). There are 32 machine-made bottles and jars in the collection (Acc. #s 10–11, 15, 18, 21–25, 29–32, 34–37, 53, 60, 83, 86, 89–92, 94–96, 106–108, and 115).

Many bottles/jars are marked with a company name or logo, plant number, date of manufacture, and mold code. Together, these markings tell the story of when and where a bottle was made and what product it might have contained. The machine-made bottles/jars in the collection with embossing are described below.

Figure 106914–1919), was in operation from 1920 to ca. 1961.

The company was based in St. Louis, Missouri. They produced Buster Cola, Cheer-Up Soft Drink,

to 1927. After Sunrise Soda Water Works was acquired by Seven-Up Company, operations moved to the Honolulu plant (Millar 1988).

Acc. # 34 is a hobble-skirt Coca-Cola bottle (Figure 107). Coca-Cola’s first contour bottle was designed by Earl R. Dean of Root Glass Company in 1915. The patent was approved on


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 178

Figure 106

Company and bottled by Sunrise Soda Water Works, complete, machine-made, crown top finish, honeycomb pattern molded on bottle, shoulder embossed “Smile // Smile” in cursive, heel embossed, “11, 1922”, base embossed, “ -I logo) 48 / 2”

Figure 107. Acc. # 34, colorless Coca-Cola hobble-skirt soda bottle, complete, machine-made,

crown top finish, shoulder embossed “Coca-Cola / TRADE-MARK REGISTERED / -105529 // Coca-Cola / TRADE-MARK REGISTERED / MIN.

- 4. (Diamond- ”


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 179

16 November 1915 and the bottle went into production in 1916 (Lockhart and Porter 2005). Coca-Cola Bottling Company was based in Atlanta, Georgia. They required all glass houses making

-Illinois Glass Company, which was created throuIllinois Glass Company -Illinois Glass Company, Ltd. in 1931 (Lockhart and Hoenig 2015; Paquett 1994). It was one of the largest glass bottle manufacturers in the world with plants located across the country. From 1930-1952, Coca-Cola required the mold code, logo, and date code to be embossed on the skirt of their bottles. Acc. # 34 is embossed with the Diamond-

-Illinois Glass Company from 1929 to 1954. To the left of the logo -Illinois Glass Company

introduced number codes in 1929, date codes were single-digit. The company realized this was an issue in the 1930s because “9” could indicate a 1929 or 1939 date. Double-digit codes were adopted in 1940, but labor shortages during World War II delayed implementation. The short-term solution was to add a dot to the end of the single digit date code to represent a 1940s date (Lockhart and Hoenig 2018). Therefore, Acc. # 34 dates to 1945.

-Illinois Glass Company and are embossed with the Diamond- Figure 108). The number to the left of the logo is the production plant. The number to the right is the year the bottle was manufactured. The number below, which is not always present, is a mold cavity code (Lockhart and Hoenig 2015). Acc. # 53 is embossed “20 (Diamond- -California plant in 1938. “C” may be a mold prefix for a food item. Acc. # 86 is embossed “7 (Diamond-operation from 1929 to 1983. Acc. # 86 dates post-1940 when basal stippling was introduced. Basal stippling involved poking tiny dots into the baseplate of the mold to prevent shallow cracks from forming as bottles rapidly cooled. The process was called “bottom plate knurling” (Lockhart and Hoenig 2018). Acc. # 108 is embossed “4 (Diamond-the Clarksb

Acc. #s 35 and 36 were manufactured by Glass Containers, Incorporated (Figure 109). The company has a long and interesting history. Long Beach Glass Company of Long Beach, California was damaged by an earthquake in 1933 and the company rebuilt outside Los Angeles

, California under the name Glass Container, Inc. They produced druggist, beverage, and beer bottles as well as fruit jars, cosmetics, and toilets. Wines and liquors were added in 1935. Flint and amber colors were added in 1937 and green in 1938. In 1947, a new plant was built in Antioch, California and headquarters moved to San Francisco, California. The company was sold to Hunt Foods in 1955, which has since been renamed to Norton-Simon Corporation. In 1968, Glass Containers bought Knox Glass Company. Acc -Way NR (non-returnable) beer bottles. The format of the embossing on the bases is plant code, logo, and date

Acc. # 35 was produced at the with angular, stylized, intertwined letters embossed on both bottles dates from 1934 to ca. 1968. Date codes were not used prior to ca. 1950 and two-digit date codes appear ca. 1960. Acc. #s 35 and 36 are embossed “7” and date to 1957. Both bottles have the same model number, “4801”. Acc. # 35 has mold code “8” and Acc. # 36 has mold code “20” (Lockhart et al. 2015).


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 180

Figure 108. 1) Acc. # 53, colorless glass food j -Illinois Glass

ase to heel fragment, embossed “20 (Diamond- -C” on base; 2) Acc. # 86, colorless glass bottle, base

-Illinois Glass Company at the Alton, Illinois plant, machine-made, valve mark, stippled base, base embossed “7 (Diamond-

-Illinois Glass Company, one body to shoulder fragment, one body fragment, and one base to body fragment, machine-made, basal stippling, orange peel texture on body, base embossed “4 (Diamond- ”

Figure 109 -Way beer bottles, machine-made,

crown top finish, basal stippling; Acc. # 35 embossed “ // GC logo)

7 / 8 / 4801 / 1 – WAY” on base; Acc. # 36, embossed “S (interlocking GC logo) 7 / 20 / 4801 / 1 – WAY” on base


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 181

Acc. # 60 was manufactured by Anchor Hocking Glass Corporation (Figure 110). The company formed in 1937 when Anchor Cap & Closure Corporation merged with Hocking Glass Company.

aute, Indiana, Connellsville, Pennsylvania, and Salem, New Jersey. The Terre Haute plant was closed only a few years later in 1939. Anchor Hocking Glass Corporation manufactured food, beverage, liquor, wine, beer, and pharmaceutical bottles. The Anchor-H trademark was used from 1938 to ca. 1980 on glass bottles, tumblers, tableware, condiment jars, mixing bowls, food-preparing vessels, food-packing jars, jugs, cosmetic jars, and cuspidors. The bottle base code sequence is model or catalog number above plant number, logo, and date above mold number. The mold number can also be located above the catalog number (Lockhart et al. 2013). Acc. # 60 is embossed “61-38 / 5 (Anchor-H trademark) 52 / 282”. This artifact was manufactured at the Connellsville, Pennsylvania plant in 1952.

Acc. #s 21 and 22 are export style amber glass Dai Nippon beer bottles (Figure 111). Japanese beer bottles were originally mold blown in champagne or export body styles with mineral finishes. After 1911, bottles were machine-made with crown top finishes. The bottles are embossed in Japanese or English with a logo of the sun (circle with a dot in the center) or monogram of the letters DNB on the shoulder/heel and five-pointed star on the base.

Acc. #s 23, 24, and 25 are machine-made amber glass beer bottles with “JAPAN” embossed on the base (Figure 112) and Acc. # 91 has “MADE IN JAPAN” embossed on the heel (Figure 113). The McKinley Tariff Act ratified by the United States in 1891 required imports be marked with their country of origin. Japan used “Nippon” until the term was declared inadequate by the United States in 1921 and all future imports were required to be labeled with “Japan” (Ross 2012:24). The Japanese characters embossed on Acc. # 91 read right to left, so the bottle dates between 1921 and World War II.

Acc. # 29 is a milk bottle. It could have been made by a semi-automatic (late 1890s to mid-1910s) or fully automatic (post-1910s) machine based on the horizontal seam on the outside edge of the finish. The same diagnostic features are shared by bottles made from semi-automatic and fully automatic machines, so Acc. # 29 dates from the late 1890s to the mid-twentieth century (BLM/SHA 2018).

Acc. # 31 was made with a press-and-blow machine based on the valve mark on the base. The mark is made as a machine’s push-rod valve ejects the partially expanded parison from the blank

incised into the surface of the glass. They are almost always seen on wide mouth machine-made bottles (e.g., food bottles and jars, milk bottles, and canning jars) dating from the early 1900s through the 1940s. Although the fragments do not mend, Acc. #s 31 and 29 could be from the same bottle (BLM/SHA 2018).

Acc. # 89 Honolulu Dairymen’s Association milk bottle (Figure 114). It has the maker’s mark for Illinois Pacific Glass Corporation embossed on the heel. The mark is “IPG” in a triangle with the “I” and “P” leaning towards the center, “G” slanted back, and a small solid embossed triangle at the apex of the larger triangle above the “P”. This mark was used from 1925-1930. Milk bottles with the triangle mark usually have a single-digit number to the left, right, or below the mark. However, it does not correspond with date code or bottle size (Lockhart et al. 2016).


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 182

Figure 110. Acc. # 60, amber Anchor Hocking Glass Corporation beer bottle, manufactured at

the Connellsville, Pennsylvania plant, base fragment, machine-made, basal stippling, embossed “61-38 / 5 (Anchor-H trademark) 52 / 282”

Figure 111. 1) Acc. # 21, amber Dai Nippon export style beer bottle, complete except for chip in

neck/finish, machine-made, crown top finish, embossed “TRADE (sun logo) MARK on

heel, and “13 (five-pointed star) 6 / Y” on base; 2) Acc. # 22, olive amber Dai Nippon export style beer bottle, complete except for chip in neck/finish, machine-made, crown top finish, embossed “TRADE (sun logo) MARK (monogram of letters DNB)” on shoulder, “DAI -pointed star) 10 / Y” on base


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 183

Figure 112. Acc. # 23, amber glass beer bottle, complete, machine-made, crown top finish,

embossed “JAPAN / 1” on base; Acc. # 24, olive amber glass beer bottle, base to body fragment, machine-base, embossed “JAPAN / 5” on base; Acc. # 25, olive amber glass beer bottle, base to body fragment, machine-made, embossed “JAPAN.” on base

Figure 113. Acc. # 91, colorless likely hair dye bottle, complete, machine-made, round base, oil

finish, embossed with Japanese characters on body that translates to “ten thousand ryou // set amount line” and “MADE IN JAPAN” on heel, dates from 1921 to World War II


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 184

Figure 114. Acc. # 89, colorless milk bottle, machine-made, one base to body, one body to

shoulder, and one neck to finish fragment, manufactured by Illinois Pacific Glass Corporation and bottled by Honolulu Dairymen’s Association, body embossed “ embossed “[HALF] PINT // (IPG in a triangle maker's mark) 1”, and base embossed “HD” with “52” inside valve mark

Acc. # 107 is also a Honolulu Dairymen’s Association milk bottle. The manufacturer is unknown. created in 1897 and changed its name to Meadow Gold Dairies in 1959 (Meadow Gold 2007).

Acc. # 94 was manufactured by Hazel-Atlas Glass Company (Figure 115). Charles Brady and Charles Tallman formed Hazel Glass Company in 1885 to make glass inserts for fruit jars. Then, the company expanded to make opal ointment pots, fruit jars, and product jars. In 1894, semi-automatic wide-mouth containers came into production. Charles Brady and associates created a new company, Atlas Glass Company, in 1896 to exclusively produce machine-made fruit jars. Hazel-Atlas Glass Company was founded in 1902 in Washington, Pennsylvania when Hazel Glass Company and Atlas Glass Company merged with other Charles Brady businesses. Afterwards, the

commercial wide-mouth container production (Whitten 2016). The base of Acc. # 93 is embossed with the HA trademark, which was used from 1923 to 1971, possibly as late as 1982. There is a single-digit mold code “8” above the trademark and four-digit catalog number “- 9313” below the trademark. This coding format is consistent with what was used during the ca. 1940s. Acc. # 93 is fragmented, but the

-Atlas Glass Company became a subsidiary of Continental Can Company, which was sold to Brockway Glass Company of Pennsylvania in 1964. Hazel-Atlas Glass Company was one of the largest glass manufacturing firms in the world with 14 plants nationwide, second only in

-Illinois Glass Company (Whitten 2016).


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 185

Figure 115. Acc. # 94, colorless jar, machine-made, two base to body and one body fragment,

base embossed “ – 9313”

Figure 116

Croup and Pneumonia Salve was the most popular. During the Spanish flu from 1918 to 1919 sales

s marks over the years. The first is a smaller triangle inside a larger triangle that dates from ca. 1910s to 1930s. Later jars, like Acc. # 95, have

manufactured by jars started being made with plastic by the early to mid-1970s (Whitten 2018).

Acc. # 83 is a homeopathic vial/bottle. The vial style came in “long” and “short” versions. Acc. # 83 is the “short” version with a wider body and bore. Most had a patent finish, although Acc. # 83 is incomplete and missing the finish. This style of bottle was used from the 1870s to the 1930s. Most have no seams and were made with a turn-mold or press-and-blow machine with a one-piece mold and date from the 1870s into the 1920s. Machine-made vials have regular vertical side seams, like Acc. # 83, and date from the 1920s to 1940s.

Acc. # 18 is an amber glass bleach bottle (Figure 117). There were two main brands that came into the American market in the twentieth century, Clorox and Purex. Clorox production began in 1913. It was sold in 5-gallon jugs for industrial use in laundries, breweries, walnut bleachers, and municipal water companies. From 1918 to 1928, Clorox was bottled in 15-ounce amber “pint” bottles by Electro-Alkaline Company, predecessor to the Clorox Company. This style of bottle was used by other companies for a variety of liquid products, so it is not diagnostic without the paper labeling. After 1929, bottles began being embossed. The company switched to white, polyethylene plastic bottles in 1960 and by 1962 the new container had replaced the amber glass bottles (Clorox Company 2018). The base of Acc. # 18 is embossed “(Diamond-


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 186

Figure 116. Acc. # 95, cobalt blue medicine jar, complete, machine-made, large-mouth external

thread, embos on base encircling triangle mark

Figure 117. Acc. # 18, cylindrical amber bleach bottle, base fragment, embossed “(Diamond-

maker’ -3”


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 187

-3”. Without the rest of the bottle to show variations in style, markings, lettering, glass texture, and handles the bottle cannot be more narrowly dated than post-1929.

Acc. # 32 is a Lysol disinfectant bottle made by Lehn & Fink (Figure 118). The business was founded in New York City, New York in 1874. Lysol was brought to the United States from Hamburg, Germany in 1890. By 1912, Lehn & Fink had reached a licensing agreement and began manufacturing Lysol in the United States. During the Spanish flu pandemic ca. 1918, the product was advertised as effective protection against influenza. In 1922, Lehn & Fink purchased Lysol from the Germans. In 1925, a new plant was opened in Bloomfield, New Jersey. Later that year, a new holding company called Lehn & Fink Products Company was formed to acquire Lehn & Fink, Inc. and A.S. Hinds Company and Items of Antiquity 2014). The trademark on Acc. # 32 was registered 22 March 1927. The artifact dates between 1927 and 1964 when the Bloomfield plant closed.

Acc. # 90 is a shoe polish bottle made by Three Rivers Glass Company (Figure 119). Three Rivers Glass Company was the first glass plant in Texas. It was in operation from 1922 to 1937. It used the maker’s mark “Three Rivers’ in various forms with a five-pointed star. Charles R. Tips founded the township of Three Rivers, formerly Hamiltonburg. At first, he tried to attract an established glass maker to the area, but one of the only individuals to respond to his advertisement

Warrick’s glass plant had burned down in a fire the previous year and he offered to help manage the plant if Charles R. Tips could raise fifty-thousand dollars. Warrick moved to Three Rivers in 1922, the company was incorporated by investors, and construction began. The first few years of operation bottles were hand-blown. However, the partners quickly realized they would not be competitive without machines. Hartford-Empire Company in Newark, New Jersey controlled production of glass machinery and were lobbied by larger companies not to sell to Three Rivers. In response, Charles R. Tips hired an engineer named Harold Trembley who had been designing glass production equipment for a Mexican glass company located across the border in Monterrey. Back on track, Three Rivers hired a new general manager named John Finkbeiner. By 1929, the plant produced 75% of the milk, beverage, packing, and food container bottles used in Texas and held thousands of trademarked glass molds. The company was doing well in the early years of the Great Depression until their principle stockholder, W.L. Moody, declared bankruptcy. In financial crisis, the company was sold to their rival, Ball Brothers Glass Manufacturing Company. Normal plant operations continued until 1937 to honor the contracts held by Three Rivers Glass Company and then the facility began being dismantled (Hinson and Simmons-Smith 1996).

5.1.2 Miscellaneous Glass Artifacts Analysis

Miscellaneous glass artifacts include one pressed glass tumbler (Acc. # 57), four milk glass jars (Acc. #s 63, 72, 98, and 104), four marbles (Acc. #s 12, 26–27, and 49), one flat glass fragment (Acc. # 16), and two unknown modern fragments (Acc. #s 33 and 93).

Acc. # 57 is a colorless pressed glass tumbler (Figure 120). To make pressed glass, molten glass is poured into a mold and “pressed” with a plunger. Pressed glass tableware was produced beginning in 1825. Early pressed glass was ornate to hide manufacturing flaws (Welker and Welker 1985). By 1865, pressed glass technology had advanced, and it became more functional and affordable. True colorless pressed glass dates post-1870 (BLM/SHA 2018). Popularity of


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 188

Figure 118. Acc. # 32, amber glass Lysol Disinfectant bottle, complete, machine-made, small

mouth external thread finish, embossed “Lysol Lysol // Lysol Lysol” on shoulder in cursive and “L. & F.

nidentified maker’s mark

Figure 119. Acc. # 90, colorless shoe polish container, complete, machine-made, manufactured

by Three Rivers Gla 51 / 2” on base


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 189

Figure 120. Acc. # 57, colorless pressed glass, tumbler, base to body fragment

pressed glass tapered out in the 1920s due to rising interest in crystal tableware (Welker and Welker 1985).

Milk glass was first in-twentieth century. It waned in popularity during

the Great Depression but experienced a resurgence after World War II. Like pressed glass, milk glass was an economical substitute for the more expensive China (BLM/SHA 2018). There are four milk glass fragments in the collection, Acc. #s 63, 72, 98, and 104 (Figure 121). Acc. # 72 is a small fragment and nothing more can be said about this artifact. Acc. #s 63 and 72 are Pond’s jars dating post-1910s. T.T. Pond Company was established in 1849 by Theron Pond, Alexander Hart, and Edmund Munson. Pond’s Extract was made with witch hazel distillate, alcohol, and water. It was advertised as a cure-all for burns, colds, catarrh, wounds, chilblains, hoarseness, sore throats, piles, scalds, bruises, sunburn, rheumatism, chapped hands, bites, boils, chafing, lameness,

introduced in the 1910s and Pond’s Extract disappeared from the scene. These new products were intended to cleanse and protect the skin (Griffin 2015). Pond’s Company probably switched from milk glass jars to regular glass jars in 1955 when the company merged with Cheseborough Manufacturing Company

Acc. # 104 is a Woodbury cold cream jar. John H. Woodbury Company was established in 1870 in Albany, New York. They produced personal care items including soap, cold cream, facial cream, facial powder, and after-shave. In 1901, the company was purchased by Andrew Jergens Company

Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, Inc. 2015). Acc. # 104 is embossed with a HA trademark on the base. The jar was manufactured by Hazel-Atlas Glass Company. Milk glass was commonly used on ointment/cream jars from the 1890s through the mid-twentieth century (BLM/SHA 2018).

Marbles are some of the first toys in history, with use during Roman times and the middle ages. Marbles can be made of ceramic, stone, or glass. Marbles were mass produced in Europe,


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 190

Figure 121. 1) Acc. # 63 and 2) Acc. # 72, T.T. Pond Company milk glass cosmetics jars, square

shape, machine-made, continuous external thread finish, embossed vertically on side panels; 3) Acc. # 98, milk glass, ointment/cream jar, body fragment, unknown method of manufacture; 4) Acc. # 104, milk glass, cold cream jar, one base to body fragment and one base to finish fragment, machine-made, oval shape, large mouth external thread finish, geometric design relief molded on body; em on base

particularly Germany, during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries (Carskadden and Gartley 1990). Germany was the world leader in marble production throughout the nineteenth century into the 1920s. Marbles were produced in the United States, but not in large quantity until the invention of the automatic marble making machine in 1901 (Randall 1971). Transitional glass marbles were made between 1896 and 1901 using a mold on a pair of tongs. The method of manufacture left a rough pontil mark on the glass (Cider Press Media 2017). Acc. # 49 is an example of this type of marble. Acc. #s 12, 26, and 27 are machine-made glass marbles with swirling colored glass. They most likely date post-1910 when glass marbles became more common in the United States (Carskadden and Gartley 1990) (see Figure 122).

Acc. # 16 is a piece of flat glass (Figure 123). Flat window glass can be diagnostic depending on, among other traits, surface texture, uniformity, and thickness. Hand-blown window glass dates to pre-1920 and machine-made window glass dates to post-1905. Cylinder window glass was made when a tube of blown glass was flattened to create a large, smooth, even sheet. Its predecessors, broad and crown glass, produced glass with less even surfaces and variable thickness (Weiland 2009). Cylinder glass was the most popular type of window glass in the early nineteenth century and an increasing demand for larger (and therefore thicker) windows resulted in a steady increase in glass thickness over time, from 0.75 mm in the early 1800s to 3.3 mm in the early 1900s, when machine-produced glass replaced cylinder glass (Weiland 2009). The thickness of Acc. # 16 is greater than 3.3 mm, so it is modern and machine-made.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 191

Figure 122. 1) Acc. # 49, glass marble, hand-made, transitional, opaque, one rough pontil mark,

swirling white and purple glass, 1896-1901; 2) Acc. # 12, glass marble, machine-made, swirling white, yellow, and green colored glass, post-1910; 3) Acc. # 26, glass marble, machine-made, swirling black, blue, and white colored glass, post-1910; 4) Acc. # 27, glass marble, machine-made, swirling green, yellow, and white colored glass, post-1910

Figure 123. Acc. # 16, pale blue aqua flat glass, modern, greater than 3.175 mm


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 192

Acc. #s 33 (Figure 124) and 93 (Figure 125) are architectural household glass fragments. The dates are unknown.

5.1.3 Ceramic Artifact Analysis

Ceramic vessels were analyzed for paste, shape, color, decoration, and origin. Paste includes “earthenware,” “stoneware,” and “porcelain.” Shapes are designated as “flatware” (e.g., plates, shallow saucers, etc.) or “hollowware” (e.g., bowls, cups, etc.). When a fragment is too small to determine general shape, the artifact is listed as “tableware” (Huddleson 2013). The terminology and dates for manufacturing and decoration techniques used in this section are from the Maryland Archaeological Conservation Lab (2002) internet site Diagnostic Artifacts of Maryland, unless otherwise noted.

, seven are flatware (Acc. #s 1–3, 61, 68, 73, and 84), 34 are hollowware (Acc. #s 4, 17, 19, 43–47, 50, 64–67, 74–75, 85, 100–102, 105, 109–111, 113, 116, and 121), and one is tableware (Acc. # 5). There are ten earthenwares (Acc. #s 1, 3, 4, 47, 61, 64–65, 75, 113, and 121), two stonewares (Acc. # 50 and 66), and 22 porcelains (Acc. # 2, 5, 17, 19, 43–46, 67–68, 73–74, 84–85, 100–102, 105, 109, 110–111, 116). Eleven of the vessels originate from Euro-America (Acc. #s 1, 3–4, 47, 61, 64–65, 75, 111, 113, and 121), 13 from Japan (Acc. #s 19, 43–46, 73–74, 85, 100, 105, 109–110, and 116), seven from China (Acc. #s 2, 5, 17, 50, 66, 68, 84), and three from Asia (China or Japan; Acc. #s 67 and 101–102). 5.1.3.1 Euro-American Ceramics

The earthenware ceramics discussed in this section were manufactured in Euro-America, which includes North America, South America, Great Britain, Ireland, and Europe.

Acc. #s 3, 4, and 65 are earthenware fragments with underglaze transfer print decoration (Figure 126). This type of decoration was made using tissue paper to transfer designs from inked, engraved copper plates onto the surfaces of ceramic vessels. Transfer printing began in Staffordshire in 1783 and was popular in the United States until the mid-nineteenth century when undecorated or minimally decorated ceramic wares came into style. There was a resurgence in use ca. 1870 and transfer printed wares remained on the market until they were replaced by decals in the early 1900s. Transfer printed color can be used to determine date range. Acc. #s 4 and 65 are decorated with mulberry, which dates from 1829 to 1867.

Acc. # 113 has cut-sponge decoration (Figure 127). The decoration was applied by dipping the sponge into the glaze color and then pressing it to the surface of the vessel. Popular designs include stars, diamonds, scrolls and daggers, flowers, geometric shapes, and animals. Acc. # 113 vessel rim is decorated with an embossed beaded design and underglaze red hand-painted band. Cut-sponge and painted or stenciled decorations were often applied alongside one another as part of a larger design. This lowered the production cost of the ware. Cut-sponge decoration dates from 1840 to the 1870s with a revival in the United States between 1915 and 1940.

Earthenwares with edge decoration have molded rim motifs painted under the glaze in blue or green. This type of decoration was inspired by eighteenth-century rococo motifs. It was the least expensive decorated tableware available from 1780 to 1860. Most wares are unmarked, so dating is based on changes in molded motifs through time. From 1775 to 1810, wares had rococo-inspired scalloped rims with impressed curved lines and blue or green underglaze painting. From 1800 to


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 193

Figure 124. Acc. # 33, architectural glass, pressed, relief molded, modern

Figure 125. Acc. # 93, green, modern, household, machine-made


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 194

Figure 126. 1) Acc. # 3, earthenware, whiteware, flatware, body fragment, underglaze blue

transfer printed pattern; 2) Acc. # 4, earthenware, whiteware, hollowware, body fragment, underglaze mulberry transfer printed pattern; 3) Acc. # 65, earthenware, whiteware, hollowware, body fragment, underglaze mulberry transfer printed pattern

Figure 127. Acc. # 113, earthenware, hollowware, dish, beaded rim with underglaze red hand-

painted band below and underglaze green cut sponge floral motif interior body decoration


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 195

the 1830s, wares had neoclassical-inspired scalloped rims with curved or strait impressed lines and blue or green underglaze painting. From the 1820s to 1830s, wares had scalloped, embossed rims with a variety of motifs including fish scales, floral garlands, feathers, and wheat. From the 1840s to 1860s, wares had unscalloped rims with impressed simple repetitive patterns and underglaze blue or green painting. From the 1860s to 1890s, wares had unscalloped rims and no impressed molding, but edging created with brush strokes continued (Samford 2002b). Acc. #s 1 and 61 have unscalloped, impressed rims with underglaze blue painting (Figure 128). They date ca. 1840s to 1860s.

Acc. # 75 is a dipped earthenware (Figure 129). This type of ware was decorated with clays that had different colors when fired or dyed with mineral oxides suspended in a liquid solution called slip. Slip could be used as a dip for the entire surface of the vessel or solution to pour, band, drip, or trail decoration. Dipped earthenwares could also be decorated by removing the slip in cut patterns and exposing the ceramic body underneath. Dipped earthenwares were the most affordable hollowware decoration available from ca. 1780s through the nineteenth century. Dating is based on decorative technique and vessel shape. Banded wares date from 1770s to early twentieth century, variegated surfaces late eighteenth century to first decade of the nineteenth century, engine-turned ca. 1770s to the late nineteenth century, mocha from 1790s to 1939, multi-chambered slip (e.g., cat’s eyes, cabling, or twigging) from 1811 through the nineteenth century, and fan decoration from ca. 1805 to ca. 1840 (Maryland Archaeological Conservation Lab 2002).

Acc. # 75 is a banded ware. Banding is the application of colored slip to a vessel horizontally mounted on a turning lathe. These wares are sometimes called “annular wares.”

Acc. #s 64 and 121 are undecorated whiteware fragments (Figure 130). They date from 1820-1890 (Maples 1998:110).

Acc. # 47 is a yellowware fragment (Figure 131). Yellowware is a type of earthenware made from yellow clays in England and North America. The paste is coarser than refined earthenwares such as whitewares and porcelains, and they are fired at higher temperatures. Yellowware production began in the United Kingdom in the late eighteenth century. By 1800, North American

Yellowware continued to be produced until the 1930s, but popularity declined around the turn of the century (Maryland Archaeological Conservation Lab 2018). Acc. # 47 is an example of banded yellowware. The blue and white bands of colored slip were applied as the vessel was turned on a lathe. It dates ca. 1840-1930 (Magid 2010).

5.1.3.2 Asian Ceramics

Twenty-three Asian ceramic vessels were collected. Seven are identified as Chinese (Acc. #s 2, 5, 17, 50, 66, 68, and 84) and 13 as Japanese (Acc. #s 19, 43–46, 73–74, 85, 100, 105, 109–110, and 116). The remaining three could not be identified as Chinese or Japanese and are thus identified as “Asian” (Acc. #s 67 and 101–102).

5.1.3.2.1 Chinese Ceramics There are three porcelain fragments with hand-painted decoration, Acc. #s 5, 17, and 68 (Figure

132). This is a common technique used by Chinese potteries throughout time.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 196

Figure 128. 1) Acc. # 1, earthenware with edge decoration, whiteware, flatware, plate, body to

rim fragment, unscalloped rim with impressed molding in simple pattern, painted under the glaze in blue; 2) Acc. # 61, earthenware with edge decoration, whiteware, flatware, plate, base to rim fragment, unscalloped rim with impressed molding in simple pattern, painted under the glaze in blue

Figure 129. Acc. # 75, dipped earthenware, hollowware, body fragment, banded “annular” ware,

cobalt blue


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 197

Figure 130. 1) Acc. # 64, whiteware, hollowware, bowl, base to body fragment, no decoration; 2)

Acc. # 121, whiteware, hollowware, body fragment, no decoration

Figure 131. Acc. # 47, yellowware, body fragment, buff paste, transparent glaze, annular slip

ware, engine-turned blue and white bands


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 198

Figure 132. 1) Acc. # 5, porcelain, tableware, base to body fragment, blue hand-painted

decoration (possibly pinecones); 2) Acc. # 17, porcelain, hollowware, rice bowl, base to body fragment, underglaze blue hand-painted decoration; 3) Acc. # 68, porcelain, flatware, plate, blue hand-painted border pattern and landscape design featuring building or pavilion, bridge, and willow trees

Canton porcelain is late eighteenth to early twentieth century blue and white Chinese ware made for export to North American markets. The border pattern is a blue band above a crisscrossed lattice in a heavier blue band with an inner border of “cloud and rain” or “network and scallop.” Another common border pattern is parallel bands of diagonal lines that meet at an angle. Landscape scenes with a building or pavilion, bridge, willow trees, river or stream, boats, and mountains are also characteristic of this type of ware. Before the American Revolution, Chinese porcelain came to the colonies through England or Holland. After the Treaty of Paris was signed in 1783, the United States began trading with China directly. As Canton wares became more affordable in the nineteenth century, use in households across economic levels increased. Canton wares reached peak popularity in the early nineteenth century. Trade declined ca. 1830, but they continued to be

include plates, dishes, soup tureens, covered vegetable dishes, teapots, coffee pots, handled tea cups and saucers, bakers, butter dishes, creamers, pudding dishes, milk pots, tankards, candlesticks, fruit baskets, and garden seats (Samford 2002a). Acc. # 2 is a Canton porcelain dish with “cloud and rain” border pattern and landscape scene painted under the glaze in blue (Figure 133).

Acc. # 84 is a porcelain teapot fragment (Figure 134). Tea was the main non-alcoholic beverage consumed by Chinese. It was present at most social occasions and it would have been rude for a host not offer their guests a cup of tea (Ritchie 1986:407). Acc. # 84 is brown-glazed on the exterior with blue designs over a white underglaze on the interior.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 199

Figure 133. Acc. # 2, Canton porcelain, hollowware, shallow dish, one base to rim and one base

to body fragment, border pattern with crisscrossed lattice in blue band above “cloud and rain.” blue and white landscape scene interior base, green to gray glaze on exterior body, no footring, unglazed base, made for export market

Figure 134. Acc. # 84, porcelain, hollowware, teapot, body fragment, exterior brown glaze,

interior decorated in hand-painted underglaze blue


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 200

Chinese stoneware is utilitarian in function. The containers were used for packing, transporting, and storing food and beverages. Most vessels were made in southern China and the body styles show little variation through time (Ritchie 1986). Acc. # 66 is a green glazed hexagon-sided ginger jar (Figure 135). It is decorated with cameo floral designs in relief. This style ginger jar is dip-glazed to below the floral panels and the inside is sealed with a thin brown slip. The jar is sealed with an unglazed, circular, flanged-lid and secured with netting or twine (Ritchie 1986:265). Acc. # 50 is a shouldered food jar lid (Figure 136). Shouldered food jars have a squat body, high shoulder, short neck, and wide mouth with an outwardly rolled rim. They contained preserved vegetables, sweet gherkins, soya bean cheese, shrimp paste, salted garlic, salted radish, salted onion, and pickled lemon. The lids were held in place with soft, unfired clay or adhesive tape. They were unglazed and hand-made or simple-molded (Ritchie 1986:242).

5.1.3.2.2 Japan started trading with the United States after the signing of the Treaty of Kanagawa in 1854.

By the 1920s, more than 50% of tableware imported to the United States was made in Japan and the number continued to rise into the 1930s (Maryland Archaeological Conservation Laboratory 2002). Most of the pieces were inexpensive and relatively poor quality. The McKinley Tariff Act ratified by the United States in 1891 required imports be marked with their country of origin. Japan used “Nippon” until the term was declared inadequate by the United States in 1921 and all future imports were required to be labeled with “Japan” (Ross 2012:24). From 1945 to 1952, Japan was occupied b

types include straight-sided cups, sake cups, sake bottles, cocoa pots, creamers, plates, bowls, saucers, pickle dishes, mustard jars, butter pats, salt shakers, eggcups, and bon-bons. Toiletry items such as hair receivers, hat pin holders, pin trays, baskets, vases, and ash trays have also been observed (Maryland Archaeological Conservation Laboratory 2002).

Acc. #s 105 and 109 have “MADE IN JAPAN” and “JAPAN” stamped on the base (Figure 137). These artifacts date post-1921 when imports to the United States were required to be labeled with “JAPAN” as the country of origin.

There are two decoration methods used on the Japanese ceramics in this collection, hand painting and transfer printing. Acc. #s 19, 43–46, and 85 are hand-painted under the glaze and date to post-1868. Acc. # 100 has hand-painted underglaze and overglaze decoration (Figure 138).

The first Japanese transfer-printed wares were produced by potters in Tajimi in 1888 and were soon copied by other major ceramic centers like Arita and Tobe. Most of the earlier transfer-print designs are blue because it was the only color that could easily withstand the high firing temperatures required to produce porcelain. However, Japanese potters overcame this color limitation in the 1870s/80s and later transfer wares have underglaze green, pink, black, yellow, and brown designs (Ross 2012:8). Acc. # 74 has a combination of underglaze green and pink hand-painted and transfer-print decoration (Figure 139).

Another type of decoration is “Winter Green,” which consists of green glaze on the interior and exterior of the vessel (Acc. #s 110 and 116 in Figure 140). It was a Chinese invention adopted by the Japanese in the seventh century (Ross 2012; Lister and Lister 1989). Chinese wares are bluish-green with blue characters painted on the base while Japanese wares are brighter green and glossier. Certain techniques can be linked to Japanese Winter Green, such as polychrome hand-


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 201

Figure 135. Acc. # 66, stoneware, hollowware, ginger jar fragment, green glazed with yellow rim

Figure 136. Acc. # 50, stoneware, shouldered food jar lid, small, unglazed, distinct inward bevel

on edges


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 202

Figure 137. 1) Acc. # 105, porcelain, hollowware, rice bowl, one base to body fragment and one

body fragment, underglaze cobalt blue hand-painted decoration, “MADE IN JAPAN” stamped on base; 2) Acc. # 109, porcelain, hollowware, tea-bowl, base to rim fragment, “JAPAN” stamped on base

Figure 138. Hand-painted decoration on Japanese ceramics 1) Acc. # 19, 2) Acc. # 43, 3) Acc. #

44, 4) Acc. # 45, 5) Acc. # 46, 6) Acc. # 85, and 7) Acc. # 100


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 203

Figure 139. Acc. # 74, porcelain, hollowware, bowl, green and pink underglaze, combination of

transfer-print and hand-painted, floral motif

Figure 140. 1) Acc. # 110, porcelain, hollowware, jar, body to rim fragment, Winter Green with

underglaze blue hand-painted floral design and green bands; 2) Acc. # 116, porcelain, hollowware, jar, body to rim fragment, Winter Green with underglaze blue hand-painted decoration


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 204

painted overglaze and the Japanese technique of kasuri-mon (incising the exterior of the vessel before glazing) (Ross 2012).

Acc. # 73 is a Japanese Geisha Girl ware (Figure 141). This style is made of thin white-bodied porcelain with overglaze decoration. It was an inexpensive ware manufactured for the western market. Decoration includes women in kimonos and landscape designs with temples, pagodas, and arched bridges. The wares are printed in red, black, or dark brown overglaze and decorated with blue, gold, red, green, and yellow overglaze enamels. Gold gilt is used to decorate handles and rims. Ca. 1910 to 1915 white and yellow enamel dots, lines, stars, and zigzags were introduced as a less expensive alternative to gold enamel. Geisha Girl porcelain is common on late nineteenth through mid-twentieth century archaeological sites (Maryland Archaeological Conservation Laboratory 2002).

5.1.3.2.3 Asia Three ceramics could not be identified as Chinese or Japanese and were thus called “Asian,”

Acc. #s 67 and 101–102 (Figure 142).

5.1.4 Miscellaneous Ceramic Artifacts Analysis

Miscellaneous ceramic artifacts include marbles (Acc. #s 28 and 69), one porcelain knob (Acc. # 20) and one porcelain tube (Acc. # 103) from an electrical wiring system, one porcelain insulator (Acc. # 112), one porcelain button (Acc. # 48), one chamber pot (Acc. # 76), one door knob (Acc. # 123), and two unknown fragments (Acc. #s 87 and 99).

Acc. #s 28 and 69 are machine-made earthenware marbles (Figure 143). Most ceramic marbles on nineteenth century archaeological sites were made in Germany, but some potteries in the United States dabbled in commercial production. Earthenware marbles are red, tan, or gray. Before the marble shaping machine was invented in 1859, earthenware marbles were hand-made. Hand-made marbles are not perfectly round and often have finger or palm prints. Sometimes they were made by children who would roll the clay in their hands and bake the balls in the oven. Starting in the 1890s, earthenware marbles were painted or dyed bright colors. Earthenware marbles were produced until the 1930s (Carskadden et al. 1985; Carskadden and Gartley 1990).

Knob and tube is the cheapest form of concealed electrical wiring. The wires are supported by knobs as they run parallel to the floor joists or studding and pass through tubes when crossing beams or partitions. The knobs can be solid or split and are held in place using wire nails. The tubes have a head at one end to keep them from moving. The wires must be rubber-insulated, run 1 inch above the surface, and 5 inches apart on different studding wherever possible. The knobs supporting the wires should be placed every 4.5 ft or less. This system was popular because of its affordability and accessibility. However, it could not be used in fireproof buildings or damp conditions. The wires have the potential to sag against beams or become covered in flammable material over time. If there were a short circuit or the wires overheated it could start a fire. The wires are also not protected against mechanical damage following installation and may be disturbed by subsequent construction or pests (Myers 2010:34). The knob and tube system boomed from 1890 to 1932 (Tod 1977). Acc. # 20 knob and Acc. # 103 tube fall within this date range (Figure 144).


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 205

Figure 141. Acc. # 73, porcelain, flatware, plate, Geisha Girl ware, blue underglaze pagoda, red,

black, green, and gold overglaze, gold gilt around rim

Figure 142. 1) Acc. # 67, porcelain, hollowware, small dish, overglaze red hand-painted band

interior rim; 2) Acc. # 101, porcelain, hollowware, bowl, body to rim fragment, hand-painted green cross hatching; 3) Acc. # 102, porcelain, hollowware, bowl, cobalt blue hand-painted design


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 206

Figure 143. 1) Acc. # 28, earthenware “clay” marble, machine-made, reddish color; 2) Acc. # 69,

earthenware “clay” marble, machine-made, tan color

Figure 144. 1) Acc. # 20, porcelain, insulator, knob, multipart mold, finished with a white glaze;

2) Acc. # 103, porcelain, wall tube, unglazed


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 207

Acc. # 112 is a porcelain insulator made through the dry pressed process (Figure 145). It would have only been used in dry conditions for lower voltages. It was made from “dry press” porcelain, which is pressed into two or three-piece steel molds. The insulators are porous, grainy, and can have dark lines where dirt has filled tiny cracks and holes in the clay (Berry 2003). It was manufactured by Illinois Electric Porcelain Company founded by C.W. Kettron in Malcomb, Illinois in 1910. He produced porcelain insulators for telephone and electrical companies (Munro

started making wet process porcelain insulators in 1915 (Gish 2018).

Acc. # 76 is a stoneware chamber pot (Figure 146). It falls under the broader category of household toiletware. It is of Euro-American origin, but the date is unknown.

Acc. # 48 is a button (Figure 147). Prosser buttons are made of fine clay, ground ceramics, and other additives pressed under high heat into a metal mold. They are also called “China” buttons or porcelain buttons (Sprague 2002:111). They were introduced in 1840 and were popular until about 1920 (Maples 1998:111).

Acc. # 123 is a ceramic doorknob with a brown glaze (Figure 148).

5.1.5 Metal Artifact Analysis

Metal artifacts in the collection consist of 13 nails (Acc. #s 7, 13–14, 39, 62, 77–80, 117, 124, and 129–130), one plug type fuse (Acc. # 81), one metal spark plug with a ceramic exterior (Acc. # 114), and one unknown fragment (Acc. # 8).

Acc. # 14 is a machine-cut nail (Figure 149). Machine-cut nails started being produced in the United States in 1790. The heads were hand-made until 1810. Between 1810 and 1825, machines were made to cut the nails without having to turn the plate (Sutton and Arkush 2002). Around 1825 to 1830 another machine was developed to head the nails automatically. Most machine-cut nails date from 1835 to 1890, although some are still made today (Adams 2002:68).

Acc. #s 7, 13, 39, 77–80, 117, and 124 are wire nails with a round heads, round shafts, consistently shaped shanks, and pointed nail ends (Figure 149). Wire nails were invented in France in 1830 and machines to make wire nails were invented in 1855. In 1873, machines were exported to the United States. By 1890, there were more wire nails than machine-cut nails on the market. However, this transition did not take place in the far western United States until ca. 1900 (Sutton and Arkush 2002:163). In 1894, wire nails started being exported to Hawai‘i by E. . Hall & Son (Hurst and Allen 1992:59).

Acc. # 62 is a possible railroad spike dating to post-1839 (Figure 149). The artifact is over 3 inches in length but corrosion impedes analysis of the head or cross section, which are necessary for positive identification.

Acc. # 81 is a “plug type” cartridge fuse (Figure 150). Plug type fuses are found mainly in pre-1970 houses.

Acc. # 114 is a spark plug with a metal core and ceramic exterior (Figure 151). It would have been used in a gasoline car engine. The first spark plug with an insulator, electrodes, and spark gap in a single unit was invented by Etienne Lenoir in 1860. The ceramic portion was introduced in 1888 (Miller et al. 2000:15).


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 208

Figure 145. Acc. # 112, porcelain insulator, white, dry pressed process, embossed

“ ”, manufactured by Illinois Electric Porcelain Company in Macomb, Illinois, 1910-1915

Figure 146. Acc. # 76, stoneware, toiletware, chamber pot, body, lid, and handle fragments


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 209

Figure 147. Acc. # 48, porcelain button, Prosser molded, one piece, round, two eyes, sew-

through, no decoration

Figure 148. Acc. # 123, ceramic door knob, most likely drawer pull, relief molded floral

decoration, dark brown glaze


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 210

Figure 149. Metal nails 1) Acc. # 14, 2) Acc. # 7, 3) Acc. # 13, 4) Acc. # 39, 5) Acc. # 77, 6)

Acc. # 78, 7) Acc. # 79, 8) Acc. # 80, 9) Acc. # 117, 10) Acc. # 124, 11) Acc. # 62

Figure 150. Acc. # 81, cartridge fuse, metal, plug type


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 211

Figure 151. Acc. # 114, transportation part, spark plug, metal core and ceramic exterior, used in

car gas engine, underglaze black stamped “AC // 84” on ceramic portion

5.1.6 Miscellaneous Artifacts

Miscellaneous artifacts consist of one Bakelite fragment (Acc. # 82), one “Type S” plastic and metal fuse (Acc. # 128), two mica windows for fuses (Acc. #s 125–126), one bone button (Acc. # 131), one shell button (Acc. # 132), two milled wood (Acc. #s 122 and 133), one rubber fragment (Acc. # 88), and one composite (Acc. # 70).

Fuses are used for overcurrent protection. Requirements effective in 1941 stated plug fuse holders in new installations must only accept “Type S” tamper resistant plug fuses. The “Type S” design prevented fuses from being used in fuse holders that had different ratings. For example, a fuse rated 16-30 A could not be used in a fuse holder intended for fuses rated 0-15 A. “Type S” fuses used three non-interchangeable current ranges from 0-15 A, 16-20 A, and 21-30 A (Dini 2006). Acc. # 128 is a “Type S” plug fuse dating post-1940 (Figure 152).

Acc. #s 125 and 126 are mica windows for fuses (Figure 153). They date to post-1920.

Acc. #s 131 and 132 are buttons. Buttons are difficult to date since the materials and styles were used for a long time. However, hand-made buttons generally date to pre-1935 when most buttons began to be made with plastics (Nayton 1992:80). Acc. # 131 is made from bone (Figure 154). Hand-made bone buttons were made up to ca. 1870 and machine-made bone buttons date from 1850 to ca. 1935 (Nayton 1992:80). Acc. # 132 is made from mother of pearl shell. Hand-made shell buttons date to pre-1900 and machine-made shell buttons date from 1850 to ca. 1935 (Nayton 1992:80). Acc. #s 131 and 132 are in poor condition; it is not possible to determine if they were made by hand or with a machine. They are both assigned pre-1935 dates.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 212

Figure 152. Acc. # 128, plastic and metal, plastic plug fuse, top glass window (missing), and “S”

type rejection base with brass contact point, post-1940

Figure 153. Mica windows for fuses, 1) Acc. # 125 and 2) Acc. # 126


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 213

Figure 154. Acc. # 131, bone button, cut/carved, one piece, round, two eyes, poor condition

Acc. # 82 is a Bakelite fragment (Figure 155). Bakelite dates from 1907-1935. It was cast into tubes, rods, and sheets that were then drilled, carved, or sliced by machinists. There are no seam marks since the pieces were machined, sanded, or hand-finished. Bakelite is black or brown. It is described as hard, strong, heavy, and brittle. It was used for electrical plugs or sockets because it

pot handles.

Acc. # 88 is a rubber fragment (Figure 156

y. During World War I, synthetic rubber was introduced.

Acc. #s 122 and 133 consist of historic milled wood fragments (Figure 157).

Acc. # 70 is a composite (Figure 158). No date is assigned.

Artifacts Summary Artifacts recovered from the project area include an array of glass and ceramic artifacts with a

wide date range from the late nineteenth to mid-twentieth century. There are no artifacts that can be definitively dated prior to the 1870s and most artifacts with a narrow date range generally fall within the twentieth century. It is possible the assemblage represents an exclusively twentieth century deposit.

Glass artifacts were collected from 12 trenches (T-1, T-2, T-3, T-4, T-5, T-6, T-14, T-15, T-16, T-17a, T-18, and T-19). The glass artifacts in the collection consists mainly of mold-blown


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 214

Figure 155. Acc. # 82, Bakelite, construction, probably used for insulation, post-1902

Figure 156. Acc. # 88, rubber, black, hollow hemisphere, unknown function, post-1851


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 215

Figure 157. Acc. # 133, milled wood fragments

Figure 158. Acc. # 70, composite


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 216

and machine-made soda, beer, milk, and food bottles/jars with some household, cosmetic, and medicinal bottles/jars (Acc. #s 6, 9, 10–11, 15, 18, 21–25, 29, 30–32, 34–38, 40–42, 51–56, 58–60, 63, 71–72, 83, 86, 89–92, 94–98, 104, 106–108, 115, 118–120, and 127). The molds and finish types provide a possible manufacture date range of ca. 1870s to 1920 for the mold-blown bottles/jars and other diagnostic features provide a possible manufacture date of ca. 1920s to 1950s for the machine-tumbler dating to post-1870 (Acc. # 57), four glass marbles dating to post-1896 (Acc. #s 12, 26–27, and 49), one modern flat glass fragment (Acc. # 16), two modern household glass fragments (Acc. #s 33 and 93).

The ceramic collection consists of Euro-American and Asian ceramics. In total, there are 34 ceramic vessels (Acc. #s 1–5, 17, 19, 43–47, 50, 61, 64–68, 73–75, 84–85, 100–102, 105, 109–111, 113, 116, and 121), one chamber pot (Acc. # 76), one ceramic door knob (Acc. # 123), two ceramic marbles (Acc. #s 28 and 69), one porcelain Prosser button (Acc. # 48), one porcelain knob (Acc. # 20) and one porcelain wall tube (Acc. # 103) from an electrical wiring system, one porcelain insulator (Acc. # 112), and two unknown ceramic fragments (Acc. #s 87 and 99). Ceramic artifacts were recovered from ten trenches (T-1, T-2, T-3, T-5, T-6, T-7, T-15, T-16, T-18, and T-19). Dates range from the mid-nineteenth century to World War II.

Miscellaneous artifacts consist of one ceramic and metal spark plug (Acc. # 114), one bone button (Acc. # 131), one mother of pearl shell button (Acc. # 132), two milled wood (Acc. #s 122 and 133), 13 metal nails (Acc. #s 7, 13–14, 39, 62, 77–80, 117, 124, and 129–130), one metal plug cartridge fuse (Acc. # 81), one unknown metal fragment (Acc. # 8), one Bakelite fragment (Acc. # 82), one plastic and metal “Type S” fuse (Acc. # 128), two mica windows for fuses (Acc. #s 125–126), one rubber fragment (Acc. # 88), and one composite fragment (Acc. # 70). The nails, ceramic and metal spark plug, and rubber fragment date from the late nineteenth to early twentieth century. The buttons, metal plug cartridge fuse, Bakelite fragment, plastic and metal “Type S” fuse, and mica windows date from the early to mid-twentieth century. The other artifacts could not be dated.

Most artifacts recovered came from strata associated with the initial stages of historic development within the project area or activities related to the former dwellings that stood on the landscape between the early to mid-twentieth century. However, some artifacts were found in fill deposits related to construction of the existing parking lot. The assemblage most likely represents a twentieth century deposit.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 217

Sediment Sample Content Analysis Eight bulk sediment samples were collected from the current AIS including four from the SIHP

# -6636 Kewalo wetlands, and four from SIHP # -8803 charcoal-enriched A horizon (Table 23). Five of the eight samples were wet-screened through a 1/4-inch screen at the CSH laboratory

bulk sediment sample from SIHP # -6636 was used for pollen analysis. Two bulk sediment samples from SIHP # -6636 were not wet-screened but are available for additional analyses if needed.

Wet-screening of SIHP # -6636 yielded charcoal, Melampidae, Neritidae, crustacean, sea urchin, seed casings, a mouse ulna, and land snails that were sent for malacological analyis. The screened contents are consistent with a typical wetland environment with evidence of post-Contact disturbance.

Sediment samples from SIHP # -8803 were collected from three features and one column sample. Wet screening of SIHP # -8803 yielded charcoal, Neritidae, Mytilidae, sea urchin, crustacean, unidentifiable shell, and fish and small mammal bone. The screened material from SIHP # -8803 suggests this was an area of habitation containing marine shell midden and fish and faunal bone related to food refuse.

Table 23. Summary of bulk sediment samples

Provenience Depth (cmbs) Description T- 200–230 Charcoal, (0.4 g) Melampidae (<0.1 g),

Neritidae (<0.1 g), crustacean (<0.1 g), sea urchin (0.1 g), seed casings (0.6 g), and a mouse ulna (<0.1 g)

T-17a, SIHP # -8803 Feature 1, Str. IIIa

141–159 Charcoal (0.7 g), Neritidae (<0.1 g), Mytilidae (<0.1 g), unidentifiable shell (<0.1 g), small mammal faunal bone (<0.1 g)

T-17a, SIHP # -8803 Feature 2, Str. IIIa

135–145 Charcoal (0.5 g), Neritidae (3.8 g), sea urchin (< 0.1 g), and unidentifiable fish

bone (0.1 g) T-17a, SIHP # -8803 Feature 3, Str. IIIa

145–155 Charcoal (<0.1 g), Nerita picea (1.3 g), crustacean (<0.1 g), faunal (<0.1 g)

T-17a, SIHP # -8803, Str. IIIa, SE sidewall, column sample 3 of 4

130–138 Charcoal (<0.1 g), unidentified shell (<0.1 g), fish scale (<0.1 g)


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 218

Faunal Analysis Archaeologists encountered various faunal osseous materials during the AIS investigation and

collected samples from nine of the 20 test excavations (Acc. #s 145 through 155). The identified faunal remains (Table 24) include cow (Bos taurus), pig (Sus scrofa), goat ( ), cat (Felis catus(Heterocentrotus mamillatus), and rodents (Microtus sp. and Mus sp.), as well as additional small fragments from various small mammals (inconsistent with human morphology). The documented faunal remains appear to be clustered in the northwest and central portions of the project area (Trenches 1, 2, 4, 5, 13, 14, 16, 17a, and 19).

The majority of these faunal remains are consistent with food refuse, predominantly encountered within stratigraphic layers composed of fill, with two exceptions encountered within the silty clay loam A horizon deposits (Acc. #s 153 and 154). A majority of the cow remains display evidence of butchering, identified by the uniform saw mark striations left behind on the cortical bone.

Faunal materials not consistent with food refuse include the remains of domesticated animals generally considered to be pets, as in the case of the dog and cat remains, or pests not generally utilized as a food source, as in the case of the rodent remains.

Table 24. Results of faunal analysis

Provenience Species; Mass Description 0145 T-1; Str. Ic

30 cmbs Cow (Bos taurus); 10.1 g

Saw-cut vertebra portions and long bone fragment

Bird (Aves); 2.5 g Long bone shaft portions 0146 T-2; Str. Ii

60-70 cmbs Cow (Bos taurus); 107.3 g

Saw-cut long bone portion and rib fragment

1.8 g

Bird (Aves); 0.2 g Long bone fragment 0147 T-4; Str. Ie

61 cmbs Cat (Felis catus); 86.2 g Partially recovered burial (long bones,

vertebral fragments, phalanges, fragmented teeth, skull fragments)

0148 T-5; Str. Ig 80 cmbs

Cat (Felis catus); 49.1 g Partially recovered burial (long bones, scapula portions, foot bones)

0149 T-13; Str. Ig 152 cmbs

Cow (Bos taurus); 12.8 g

Proximal epiphysis fragment

0150 T-14; Str. If Meadow vole (Microtus sp.); 1.0 g

Right hemi-mandible

0151 T-14; Str. If Cat (Felis catus); 30.1 g Partially recovered burial (long bones, phalanges, foot bone)


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 219

Provenience Species; Mass Description 0152 T-16; Str. Ic

80 cmbs Cow (Bos taurus); 58.1 g

Saw-cut long bone section

Goat ( ); 44.3 g

Tibia portion, os coxa portion

Turtle (Testudines); 1.5 g

Carapace fragments

1.3 g

Unidentified skull fragments

0153 T-17a; Str. IIa 132 cmbs

Small mammal; 0.2 g Unidentified small fragments

0154 T-17a; Str. IIb 115-125

Pig (Sus scrofa); 15.7 g Fragmented incisor, long bone fragments

0155 T-19; Str. Id

Bird (Aves); 0.2 g Scapula Slate pencil urchin (Heterocentrotus mamillatus); 0.7 g

Spine

5.4.1 Malacology

-screening of a bulk sediment sample collected from T-8 containing the SIHP # -6636 Kewalo wetlands. The residue was dried, weighed, and sorted. The snails were submitted for malacological analysis to Carl Christensen, Ph.D. on 21 December 2018 (see Appendix B for full report). The analysis of the snails involved examination and identification under a low-power stereomicroscope and all nonmarine mollusk

ents containing the shell apex were counted to avoid double counting of broken shells (Christensen 2019). All specimens were accessioned into the malacological collections of the Bishop Museum, Honolulu, for future researchers.

Eight species of nonmarine mollusks were represented including Sturanya sp., Assiminea , Ty , sp., Lamellidea sp., Tornatellides sp., sp.,

Succinea sp., and . Dr. Christensen states that:

The presence of is typical of lowland wetlands throughout the Hawaiian Islands, and the species is almost invariably present in samples of nonmarine mollusks from such sites (e.g., Christensen 2012, 2013, 2014a, 2014b, 2015, 2016b, 2017). The amphibious strandline species and

may also be present in such sites (e.g., Christensen 2017). Native terrestrial snails (Sturanya, Lamellidea, Tornatellides, ‘Succinea’) may also be found (e.g., Christensen 2017). The presence of the prehistorically introduced land snail is consistent with the pre-Contact and post-initial human settlement age. [Christensen 2019:5]

The results indicate the nonmarine mollusks represent a likely cultivated wetland dating from pre-Contact times through the early twentieth century.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 220

Pollen Analysis Three pollen samples (Samples 1 through 3) extracted from three bulk sediment samples

thought to be buried wetland soils (SIHP # -6636) were collected during the AIS investigation (Table 25). These samples were submitted for pollen analysis to Bruce G. Phillips, M.S., of EcoPlan Associates, Inc. on 9 January 2019 (see Appendix C for full report). Due to safety concerns upon entering the trench, pollen samples were extracted from bulk sediment samples. Analysis of Samples 1 through 3 involved the identification of pollen and charcoal content and the identification of a transitional sediment that might coincide with the cultural modifications associated with the creation of SIHP # -6636.

Table 25. Summary of pollen samples

Sample Provenience

Sample 1 T-

Sample 2 T-

Sample 3 T-

Pollen samples were sent out for analysis on 9 January 2019 and CSH is awaiting results.

Wood Taxa Analysis Three charcoal samples were sent to the IARII for wood taxa identification (Table 26). The full

charcoal report (Huebert 2019) is presented in Appendix D. Charcoal and wood samples were selected from SIHP # -6636 wetlands and SIHP # -8803 within one intact pit feature and a general bulk sample. The taxa identification served to aid in the selection of wood samples for radiocarbon dating by indicating which samples were of short-lived species.

The wood taxa analysis identified three common native trees and shrubs ( , and ‘akoko), a Polynesian introduced tree (Aleurites moluccana, kukui), and small unidentifiable fragments representing monocot stems. No American or European-introduced species such as kiawe ( ) were found within the wood samples.

Taxa Sample 1 was collected from SIHP # -6636, T-230 cmbs. The sample was found to contain three identifiable taxa including Aleurites moluccana(kukui), sp. (‘akoko), and ( ). Due to its provenience and quantity of charcoal, the kukui sample was sent to Beta Analystic, Inc., for radiocarbon dating.

Taxa Sample 2 was collected from SIHP # -8803, T-17a, southeast sidewall from a wet-screened sample collected between 130 to 138 cmbs. The sample was found to contain two identifiable taxa, two common native trees and shrubs, and two indeterminate hardwoods. The two taxa consist of ( ) and Acacia koa (koa). hardwood twig was selected for submittal to Beta Analytic, Inc. for radiocarbon dating due to its general stratum provenience.

Taxa Sample 3 was collected from SIHP # -8803, T-17a, Feature 1, between 141 to 159 cmbs.The sample was found to contain two identifiable taxa, two common native trees and shrubs, and

Cultu

ral S

urve

ys H

awai

‘i Jo

b Co

de: W

AIK

IKI 2

49

Re

sults

of L

abor

ator

y A

naly

sis

AIS

R fo

r the

TMK

s: [1

] 2-3

-018

:052

–060

, 074

, 075

, and

077

22

1

Tabl

e 26

. Ide

ntifi

ed w

ood

taxa

Prov

enie

nce

WID

L N

o.

Tax

a C

omm

on/

Part

W

eigh

t (g

) T-

8, S

IHP

# -6

636,

St

r. I

b,

-230

cm

bs

1834

-1

Aleu

rite

s mol

ucca

na

Kuk

ui

Poly

nesi

an in

trodu

ctio

n N

utsh

ell

0.03

18

34-2

Al

euri

tes m

oluc

cana

K

ukui

Po

lyne

sian

intro

duct

ion

Nut

shel

l 0.

02

18

34-3

sp

. ‘A

koko

En

dem

ic

Woo

d

0.08

18

34-4

oa

huen

se

weo

weo

En

dem

ic

Woo

d 0.

01

T-17

a, S

IHP

#

-880

3, S

tr. II

I, SE

w

all,

130-

138

cmbs

1834

-5

Inde

term

inat

e ha

rdw

ood

– –

Woo

d 0.

01

18

34-6

oa

huen

se

weo

weo

En

dem

ic

Woo

d <0

.01

18

34-7

Ac

acia

koa

K

oa

Ende

mic

W

ood

<0.0

1

1834

-8

Inde

term

inat

e ha

rdw

ood

– –

Woo

d-tw

ig

<0.0

1

T-17

a, S

IHP

#

-8

803,

Str.

III,

Fea.

1,

141-

159

cmbs

1834

-9

Acac

ia k

oa

Koa

En

dem

ic

Woo

d 0.

10

1834

-10

Inde

term

inat

e m

onoc

ot

– –

Woo

dy

stem

0.

01

18

34-1

1 oa

huen

se

weo

weo

En

dem

ic

Woo

d 0.

02

18

34-1

2 Ac

acia

koa

K

oa

Ende

mic

W

ood

0.01


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 222

one indeterminate monocot. The two taxa consist of ( ) and Acacia koa (koa). Due to its provenience and quantity of charcoal, the ( ) sample was sent to Beta Analytic, Inc., for radiocarbon dating.

5.6.1 Characteristics of Select Identified Taxa

kukui is a Polynesian-introduced tree species common in “mesic valleys especially between 0-700 m on most main islands” (Wagner et al. 1990:598 in Bishop Museum 2010). Kukui had many medicinal uses, including the treatment of infected sores. The non-medicinal uses for this plant were also many and varied:

Non-Medicinal Uses: The light-weight wood can be used for canoes (Abbott 1992:81; Malo 1951:21); the bark for dye and fruits and oil for light (Hillebrande 1888:400); ‘nuts’ (oily endosperm) placed inside bamboo as torch (kali kukui) or oil burned in lamps (Abbott 1992:77), fish floats from wood (Degener 1930:197), oil for fishing, polishing; soot collected on smooth, clean pebbles under which kukui nuts had been burned for tattooing (Abbott 1992:128; Handy and Handy 1972:232), dye also from the fleshy part of the green part of fruit also for tattooing (not as good), the ‘meat’ of the seed (endosperm) roasted and eaten as ‘inamona relish (Handy and Handy 1972:231); endosperm also used in fish bait (Abbott 1992:85; Krauss 1993:45); sap as adhesive (Abbott 1992:120; Degener 1930:77), the oil as a polish (Krauss 1993:22), oil used to clean birdlime from bird’s feet (Degener 1930:290), sticks burned in divining ceremony (Degener 1930:199). Used for hula altars (Pukui 1942); ‘nuts’ for lei (Krauss 1993:79); wood for house timbers (Handy and Handy 1972:232). In the Ethnology Collection at Bishop Museum there are examples of kukui oil used to make kapa waterproof and there is a post-contact example of the wood made into a bowl. [Bishop Museum 2019]

‘Akoko is an endemic species containing sixteen species found in mostly dry to mesic vegetation (Wagner et al. 1990:604–617). The uses include the following:

Medicines: Leaf buds fed to children or to lactating mothers to treat ‘ea and pa‘ao‘ao. To insure or augment mothers’ milk ‘akoko sap with kalo leaves (taro, colocasia esculenta), ingested in poi. For the ailment ‘ala‘ala hamani, sap is mixed with powdered ‘ahu‘awa stem as an ointment. Treatment for kohepopo and wai‘opua hinanawe (womens’ weakness, debilitation,) combines ‘akoko leaf buds, ‘ohi‘a‘ai bark, mature noni fruit (morinda citifoliaSaccharum officinarum), ‘ala‘ala Wainui pehu ( spp.), and pia (Tacca

) (Chun 1994:25–26).

Non Medicinal Uses: C. celastroides (as C. lorifolia) noted as ‘much used as firewood’ by Hillebrand 1888:396; sap used in paint (Krauss 1993:50); leaves sap medicinal (Chun 1994:25–26). [Bishop Museum 2019]

is an endemic species occurring in from coastal zones to dry forest and subalpine shrubland consisting of lightly scented shrubs, sometimes appearing tree-like (Wagner et al. 1990:538). The uses include the following:


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 223

Medicines: This plant is used to treat ‘ea (thrush, etc.) and pa‘ao‘ao (ailments). The leaf buds are used to treat children; the bark is ingested [sometimes with niu (coconut, Cocos nucifera), kukui (Aleurites moluccana), lipoa ( spp.), or poi] as a cosmetic for children. For ‘ea, ‘aweoweo is ground together with uluhe (wawae ‘iole kuahiwi, cf. spp.), ‘ala‘ula (wawae ‘iole kahakai, cf. Codium edule), ‘ilima (Sida fallax), and marine shells, then mixed with water and fed to childred in poi or possibly ‘uala (sweet potato, batatas) (Chun 1994:64–66)

Non Medicinal Uses: Leaves cooked and eaten as greens (Hillebrande 1888:380; Malo 1951:23). Part of compsite fish hooks (Kamakau 1976:77; Krauss 1993:43) ‘The kahuna ho‘omanamana called this plant ‘iloe holokula, because it was used

Wikstroemia) and some bitter plants as firewood in the fireplaces used to send prayers’ but also positive medicinal qualities (Chun 1994:64). The wood of the ‘aheahea is not true wood, but secondary growth (Lamb 1981:36). [Bishop Museum 2019]

Koa is an endemic species commonly found in dry to wet forests on most main islands (Wagner et al. 1990:641–642. The uses include the following:

Medicines: The young leaves used to induce sleep for cramps or fevers; ashes of burnt leaves smeared on lesions for ‘ea (thrush) and pa‘ao‘ao in children (Chun 1994:156).

Non Medicinal Uses: Noted as ‘one of the most common trees on all islands . . . equally useful for fuel and construction’; trunks (in former times) used for great was canoes (Hillebrand 1888:113); bark for dye and tanning, all types of canoes, paddles (Degener 1930:177–8; Malo 1951:20); branches used in rituals (Malo 1951:174); bark for dye, wood for surfboards (Krauss 199365, 96); Abbott (1992:68) says no record of koa for traditional house building. Wood traditionally used as bearing sticks and kahili handles (Lamb 1981:47); now for furniture and bowls, but calabashes for food (‘umeke) were not traditionally made from koa as a bad taste was imparted. Wood also used in making weapons (Abbott 1992:110). Sometimes placed on hula altars (Pukui 1942). [Bishop Museum 2019]

Radiocarbon Analysis Three samples of identified, short-lived endemic, Polynesian introduced, and an indeterminate

hardwood collected from SIHP # -6636 and SIHP # -8803 were sent to Beta Analytic, Inc. of Miami, Florida for radiocarbon dating. All of the charcoal samples were first identified through wood taxa analysis by Jennifer Huebert, Ph.D., or IARII (see above). Table 27 summarizes the results of the radiocarbon analysis, the full report from Beta Analytic, Inc. is presented in Appendix E.

Radiocarbon samples were sent to Beta Analytic, Inc. on 14 February 2019. CSH is awaiting results.

Cultu

ral S

urve

ys H

awai

‘i Jo

b Co

de: W

AIK

IKI 2

49

Resu

lts o

f Lab

orat

ory

Ana

lysis

AIS

R fo

r the

TMK

s: [1

] 2-3

-018

:052

–060

, 074

, 075

, and

077

22

4

Tabl

e 27

. Res

ults

of r

adio

carb

on d

atin

g an

alys

is

B

eta

Ana

lytic

Sam

ple

Mat

eria

l/ A

naly

tic T

echn

ique

Pr

oven

ienc

e C

onve

ntio

nal

Rad

ioca

rbon

Age

C13

/C12

R

atio

O

xcal

Cal

ibra

ted

Cal

enda

r A

ge (2

sigm

a)

1/18

34-1

Cha

rcoa

l (K

ukui

)/AM

S T-

8, S

IHP

# -6

636,

-2

30 c

mbs

2/18

34-8

Cha

rcoa

l (In

dete

rmin

ate

hard

woo

d)/A

MS

T-17

a, S

IHP

#

-880

3, S

tr. II

I, SE

w

all,

130-

138

cmbs

3/18

34-1

1

Cha

roca

l (‘

weo

weo

)/AM

S T-

17a,

SIH

P #

-880

3, S

tr. II

I,

Fe

a. 1

,

141-

159

cmbs

Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: WAIKIKI 249 Historic Property Descriptions

AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 225

Section 6 Property Descriptions CSH personnel identified five archaeological historic properties, including one previously

identified and four newly identified historic properties, within the project area during this AIS: SIHP # -6636, Kewalo wetlands; SIHP # -8801, ‘auwai; SIHP # -8802, buried road; SIHP # -8803, charcoal-enriched A horizon; and SIHP # -8804, human skeletal remains. The historic properties are summarized below and their distributions are depicted on Figure 159 and Figure 160.

50-80-14-6636 FORMAL TYPE: Subsurface Kewalo wetlandsFUNCTION: Agriculture, aquaculture, and habitation PREVIOUS DOCUMENTATION

Allen 1997, Altizer et al. 2011, Blahut et al. 2019, Belluomini et al. 2016, Belluomini and Hammatt 2019, Clark and Grosser 2005, Enanoria et al. 2015, Enanoria et al. 2019a and b, Farley et al. 2019, Hammatt 2008, Hammatt 2013, Hunkin et al. 2013, Manirath and Shideler 2017, Mintmier et al. 2013, Morriss et al.

McDermott 2014, Park and Collins 2008, Runyon et al. 2011, Runyon et al. 2012, Tulchin and Hammatt 2005

NUMBER OF FEATURES:

No new features were identified within the current project. There are five previously identified features.

FEATURE TYPES: Feature 1: sand berm, associated coral wall and wooden post ntial retaining wall (Manirath

and Shideler 2017); Features 3 and 4: man-made berms associated with agricultural practices (Enanoria et al. 2019b); and Feature 5: Loko Kuwili associated with LCA 6450 (Enanoria et al. 2019b)

AGE: Pre-Contact to early twentieth century, approximately AD 340-600 (earliest radiocarbon date) to 1920s and 1930s (land reclamation)

DISTRIBUTION: -8) within the southwest portion of the current project area, and a total interpolated area of approximately 73.1 acres throughout the Kewalo area

DIMENSIONS: 132.52 acres (53.62 hectares) LOCATION: Interpolated boundaries extend as far north as McKinley High

School, as far east as Atkinson Drive, as far south as Ala Moana Boulevard, and as far west as Cooke Street.

LAND JURISDICTION: Cuzco Development, LLC, Watumull Enterprises, LTD; JL Avalon Capbridge, LLC; and Maruito USA, Inc.; City and County of Honolulu; Cody Properties, LLC; Kaka‘ako Associates, LLC; General Growth Properties Ala Moana; Kewalo Development LLC; Sam House Development, LLC; and Izuo Brothers, Ltd.,


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 226

Figure 159. Portion of the 1998 Honolulu USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle overlaying

the current project area and associated test excavations depicting historic properties


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 227

Figure 160. Google Earth Aerial Imagery (2013) overlaying the current project area and

associated test excavations depicting historic properties


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 228

SIHP # -6636 is a previously identified historic property consisting of subsurface Kewalo wetlands. SIHP # -6636 dates from pre-Contact to the early twentieth century and consists of wetland and pond deposits, agricultural berms, and potential associated infrastructure (e.g., retaining walls). There are five previously identified Features of SIHP # -6636: Feature 1: sand

wall (Manirath and Shideler 2017); Features 3 and 4: man-made berms associated with agricultural practices (Enanoria et al. 2019b); and Feature 5: Loko Kuwili associated with LCA 6450 (Enanoria et al. 2018b). Interpolated boundaries extend as far north as McKinley High School, as far east as Atkinson Drive, as far south as Ala Moana Boulevard, and as far west as Cooke Street. The distribution of SIHP # -6636 within these studies is depicted on 1998 Honolulu USGS topographic quadrangle and 1927 historic aerial (Figure 161 and Figure 162) and a summary of previous findings is presented below and adapted from Blahut et al. 2019.

Numerous studies have identified SIHP # -6636 including within [1] 2-3-016:003, 004, and 008 (Blahut et al. 2019); [1] 2-3-010:019–021, 024–026 (Altizer et al. 2011); [1] 2-1-044:003, 039, and 044 (Belluomini et al. 2016); [1] 2-3-038:001 por. (Belluomini and Hammatt 2019); [1] 2-3-003:075 (Clark and Grosser 2005); [1] 2-3-004, 2-3-004:069, 2-3-007, 2-3-007:033, 2-3-038:006, 2-3-039:004, and 011 (Enanoria et al. 2015); [1] 2-3-006:017 (Enanoria et al. 2019a); [1] 2-3 plats 004, 007, and 038–041 (Enanoria et al. 2019b); [1] 2-3-038:001 por. (Farley et al. 2019); [1] 2-3-021:008–010 (Hunkin et al. 2013); [1] 2-3-021:037 and 039 (Manirath and Hammatt 2017); [1] 2-1-044:001, 032 (Mintmier et al. 2013); [1] 2-3-038:001 (Morriss et al. 2013); [1] 2-3-010:028

-3- -3-009:001 and 2-3-030 (Park and Collins 2008); [1] 2-3-038:001 por. (Pammer and McDermott 2014); [1] 2-3-004:080, 2-3-006:014 (Runyon et al. 2011); [1] 2-3-007:026 and 049 (Runyon et al. 2012); [1] 2-3-004:073, 2-3-005:027, 2-3-006:014, and 2-3-007:002 (Tulchin and Hammatt 2005), and the current study.

6.1.1 Previous Documentation

The Kewalo wetlands were initially studied by Allen (1997). Although not designated a historic property at the time, the wetlands were later designated as a component of SIHP # -6636. Extensive testing including pollen analysis and radiocarbon dating was conducted. Pollen analysis of wetland soils indicated a dominance of Pritchardia sp. pollen in the lower strata which decreases with the Kewalo wetland humic deposits. This is in concert with an increase of sedges and grasses such as Cyperaceae and Poaceae. Radiocarbon dating of the layers was conducted with Layers II and III representing the Kewalo wetlands:

The-uppermost radiocarbon-age reported from-this-column is 460 ± 60 B.P. at a depth of 155-167 cm below the surface (cmbs) in Layer II. A radiocarbon age of 350 ± 60 B.P. was reported from Layer III at a depth between 169 and 171 cmbs.

Radiocarbon dates from the base of the column between 389 and 425 cmbs range from 4470 ± 50 B.P. to 6770 ± 70 B.P., with inversions. [Allen 1997:2]

A conventional age of 1600 ± 60 BP was determined for the gleyed silty clay with sand banded layer collected wetlands developed from a lagoonal environment sometime between AD 350 and AD 1645,


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 229

The Kewalo wetlands were first designated SIHP # -6636 by archaeological inventory survey for a 6- Kewalo wetland sediments were identified within 22 of 24 backhoe test excavations. These sediments were identified ranging in depth from describes SIHP #-6636 as follows:

Site 50-80-14-6636 consists of the pre-contact to early 20th century land surface that underlays the dredged fill materials from the Kewalo and Ala Wai Canal land reclamation projects, which took place in the 1920s and the 1930s. This land surface is a wetland deposit (Stratum III), which probably extends across the entire project area. This site also contains a sand berm that crosses the southeast corner of the project area. This sand berm is illustrated on an 1884 map, but may have been constructed earlier. Radiocarbon date determinations for the sand berm do not give

2003:69]

The soils associated with SIHP # -6636 are described as follows:

Substratum IIIa is a very dark brown sandy clay loam with a high percentage of platy organic material. The layer contained charcoal, marine gastropods and bivalves, and fish scales. Substratum IIIb is a very dark grayish brown sandy loamy clay with less organic material. It also contains charcoal, marine invertebrates, and fish scales; in addition it was also characterized by inclusion of rounded basalt

]

was identified with coral boulders along one side, suggesting a retaining wall was utilized. A second feature is a wooden fence post. Radiocarbon analysis of organic sediment collected from within the sand berm produced a two-sigma calibrated date of AD 1660 to 1890 (78.1%

of SIHP # -6636 Feature 1 (Hammatt 2013).

are et al. (2004) documented SIHP # -6636 during an archaeological inventory survey for the Ko‘olani Condominium project. The wetland sediments were identified as ranging from 0.85 mbs to 2.35 mbs. The Kewalo wetlands sediments were designated as Strata IIIa and IIIb. The Kewalo wetland sediments were described as “sandy clay loams with various high percentages of organic material to fine, well-

scribe SIHP # -6636 as follows:

Stratum III represents the original ground surface before the Kewalo area was filled with marine and other sediments in the early part of the 20th century. This layer was found in 10 of the 13 trenches. It was divided into two sub-strata. It also contains, though a limited amount and variety of charcoal flecking and marine invertebrates. The Marine shells identified included Natica sp., (Family Naticidae) Nerita sp. (Family Neritidae), Bittium sp. (Family Cerithidae), and Brachidontes sp. (Family Mytilidae) Stratum III represents the original wetland surface of the Kewalo area. This wetland stratum has been given the designation of State Site 50-80-14-


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 230

Figure 161. Portion of the 1998 Honolulu USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle depicting the project area, previous

archaeological studies, and interpolated boundaries of SIHP # -6636


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 231

Figure 162 evious archaeological studies, and

interpolated boundaries of SIHP # -6636


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 232

The full dimensions are not known, as this layer is discontinuous due primarily to 20th century landfill operations. Additionally, when encountered it was obvious that the layer extends past the trenches, in all directions.

The layer in certain areas contains charcoal flecking and marine shell, suggestive of pre-contact utilization. Subsequently in the 1920s, and 1930s, this layer was completely covered with fill material for the expanding urbanization of Honolulu.

Tulchin and Hammatt (2005) identified Kewalo wetland sediments during the Phase 2 portion of the archaeological inventory survey for the Ko‘olani Condominium project. The depths of these sediments were identified as ranging from 1.65 mbs to 2.60 mbs. Tulchin and Hammatt (2005) designated Kewalo wetland sediments as Stratum II. Kewalo wetland sediments were described as “gray sandy clay to clay sediments” to “dark gray loam” containing abundant organic material and land snail shells” underlying fill sediments (Tulchin and Hammatt 2005:27). No cultural material was observed in Stratum II.

Tulchin and Hammatt (2005:29) describe SIHP # -6636 as follows:

Within the Phase 2 testing area, Site -6636 consisted of gleyed sandy clay to clay sediments, immediately overlying the coral shelf. Site -6636 was observed in varying thickness within seven of the eight excavated test trenches, at depths ranging from 165-260 cmbs. Within Trench 7, Site -6636 contained loam-type sediments, containing abundant organic material and land snail shells. The entire extent of Site-6636 is unclear, as the layer is discontinuous, primarily due to 20th century land filling operations. In the 1920s and 1930s, the original wetland surface of the Kewalo area (i.e. Site-6636) was completely covered with fill material for the expanding urbanization of Honolulu. [Tulchin and Hammatt 2005:29]

Clark and Grosser (2005) identified SIHP # -6636 as the subsurface remnant of a small pond within 37 of 45 backhoe trenches during an archaeological inventory survey. Clark and Grosser (2005) designated SIHP # -6636 as “Layer II Pond Facies.” Radiocarbon analysis of the pond sediment yielded calibrated (two sigma) date ranges of AD 1530-1560, AD 1630-1690, AD 1730-1810, and AD 1920-1950, suggesting the pond sediment had begun accumulating as early as AD 1530-1560 (Clark and Grosser 2005:34). The pond sediment was found beneath thick historic and modern fill layers.

Clark and Grosser (2005) described SIHP # -6636 as follows:

This unnamed pond is represented by gleyed deposits of Layer II Pond Facies . . . Layer II Pond Facies is the uppermost intact stratigraphic layer found in the northern portion of the parcel, and is a very dark brown to black organic deposit similar to peat. Ranging from 1.0 to 15.0 cm thick, Layer II Pond Facies was found at or below the water table, and is discontinuous probably due to disturbance during deposition of historic fill layers.

It is not certain whether this pond was a fishpond or a salt pond used for salt manufacture. Abundant fresh water snail remains, identified as Melanoides tuberculata, were found among the organic materials within Layer II Pond Facies,


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 233

indicating a freshwater environment. However, a freshwater environment may reflect post-use changes. [Clark and Grosser 2005:47]

Park and Collins (2008) results were consistent with the nearby Clark and Grosser (2005) study.

Hammatt (2008) identified Kewalo wetland sediments during archaeological monitoring for the Ko‘olani Condominium project; the parcel was subject to a previous archaeological inventory

-6636 within the study area was not recorded during monitoring, the wetland sediments were composed of sandy clay found generally between 1.0 mbs to 1.86 mbs and designated Stratum III.

Hammatt (2008:37) described Kewalo wetland sediments as follows:

Stratum III represents the original ground surface before the Kewalo area was filled with marine and other sediments in the early part of the 20th century. It was divided into two sub-strata. It contained a limited amount and variety of charcoal flecking and marine invertebrates. [Hammatt 2008:37]

Altizer et al. (2011) identified Kewalo wetland sediments within Sewer Line G during archaeological monitoring for the Kapi‘olani Area Revised Sewer System project. These sediments were identified as ranging in depth from 1.8 mbs to 2.2 mbs. They designated SIHP # -6636 as Strata IIa and IIb. These sediments were described as “black clay loam” and “very dark gray silt loam” underlying thick historic and modern fill layers (Altizer et al. 2011:48). Altizer et al. (2011) describe SIHP # -6636 as follows:

The stratigraphic sequence of Line G at STA 3+25, where SIHP # 50-80-14-6636 was encountered, is consistent with the 1884 Bishop Waikiki Survey Map (RM # 1090) and the 1897 Monsarrat map (RM #1910), which show a pond present in the vicinity of the current project area. The pond is not named on either map, but is present within former rice fields. The sediments encountered during monitoring activities associated with Sewer Line G are described as black clay loam, which is not typic

The abundance of land snails, also documented in Sewer Line G, are indicative of wetland deposits as well. [Altizer et al. 2011:69]

Runyon et al. (2011) identified Kewalo wetland sediments below fill deposits within three of 29 test excavations (Trenches 6, 14, and 27) during an archaeological inventory survey for the Ko‘olani Phase II project. Runyon et al. (2011) designated Kewalo wetland sediments below fill deposits as Stratum II i

Runyon et al. (2011) describes SIHP # -6636 as follows:

SIHP # 50-80-14-6636 consists of portions of the former wetland surface of the ntified within

associated Addendum Inventory Survey (Tulchin and Hammatt 2005). The characteristics that define SIHP #-6636 would have extended beyond the designated site boundaries before modern fill events took place. Cultural modifications to the site likely included but were not limited to channelized ditches, ponds, lo‘i, berms, and habitation areas as shown on historic maps. The cultural


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 234

modifications impacted the wetland sediments as evidenced by the frequent charcoal flecking found within the sediment.

The existence of this site is known only within tested areas. It is likely that wetland sediments very similar to those encountered during this project, exist under fill

al. 2003).

The site consists of dark grayish brown and very dark brown clay loam sediments with a high organic (peaty) content, abundant land snail shells and charcoal flecking. The wetland sediment overlies marine sediments and the coral shelf. SIHP #-6636 was observed in three of the test trenches (Trenches 6, 14 and 27) during the current inventory survey investigation. SIHP #-6636 was observed from 1.3 to 2.4 m below the current ground surface.

The entire extent of SIHP #-6636 is unclear, as the layer is discontinuous, primarily due to twentieth century land filling operations. In the 1920s and 1930s, the original wetland surface of the Kewalo area was completely covered with fill material for the expanding urbanization of Honolulu. [Runyon et al. 2011:262–264]

Runyon et al. (2012) identified Kewalo wetland sediments within all 13 test excavations (Trenches 1–13) during an archaeological inventory survey for the Senior Residence at Pi‘ikoi. They designated Kewalo wetland sediments as Strata IIa, IIb, and IIc. These sediments ranged from 1.6 mbs to 2.5 mbs. Runyon et al. (2012:146) described SIHP # -6636 as follows:

SIHP #50-80-14-6636 consists of portions of the former wetland surface of the

identified within the Phase 1 and Phase II portions of the Ko‘olani Condominium 2011).

The site boundary within the current project area is known only within tested portions of the project area. However, based on the distribution of SIHP #-6636 in the vicinity of the project area, this portion of SIHP #-6636 is likely discontinuous w

project.

Within the current project area, SIHP #50-80-14-6636 was found beneath thick layers of various fill materials (hydraulic fill or pump dredge and crushed coral) that were imported during early twentieth century Land Reclamation fill events. In general, the natural wetland contained two distinct strata. The upper stratum of SIHP #-6636 consisted of a silty clay loam containing abundant decomposing organic materials (peat), snail shells, rootlets and charcoal flecking representing an intact buried A-Horizon. The lower strata of SIHP #-6636 consisted of gleyed sandy clay wetland sediment containing rootlets and small snail shells. The buried wetland sediments (SIHP #-6636) were observed within all excavated trenches and were found directly overlying the coral shelf. The stratigraphy observed during this study is similar to studies in the near vicinity which have documented SIHP # -6636. [Runyon et al. 2012:146]


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 235

Morriss et al. (2013) identified Kewalo wetland sediments within 22 of 26 backhoe test excavations during the archaeological inventory survey for the Ala Moana Center ‘Ewa Mall Expansion project. The Kewalo wetlands sediments were designated as Strata II and III. Pollen and phytolith analysis showed the wetland sediments observed were indicative of a sedge marshland. The margins of the marsh were dominated by grasses, sedges, and kolea trees. A variety of sea grass known as grew within the marsh. Local vegetation in the vicinity included native ‘ahea, kolokolo, ahakea lau li‘i or , coconut, loulu palm, ‘a‘ali‘i, legumes, kadua, aulu, ‘ihi, as well as grasses and ferns. This wetland environment was modified at some point during the nineteenth or twentieth century based on the presence of alien (introduced) kiawe pollen and the lack of sedge and non-wind dispersed pollen. This may have been related to making the region viable for agriculture, aquaculture, salt pan operations, and/or due to land reclamation efforts (Morriss et al. 2013).

Morriss et al. (2013) described SIHP # -6636 as follows:

The wetland sediments observed within the current project area consist primarily of greenish-gray sandy clays containing decomposing organics, charcoal, and snail shells. These sediments were documented at depths ranging from 99 to 190 cm below the surface (cmbs), with an average upper boundary of 141 cmbs. Peat was observed as distinct layers, usually directly above the sandy clays, and as inclusions within the sandy clays. No cultural materials were observed within the wetland surface, except where this surface was disturbed in historic times. Microscopic charcoal fragments were identified in the wetland samples examined for pollen. The presence of charcoal in these deposits corresponds with the region being inhabited throughout the prehistoric/historic period, and utilized for agriculture, aquaculture, and salt production. [Morriss et al. 2013:168–170]

Hammatt (2013), during the City Center archaeological inventory survey, identified a buried land surface comprised of wetland sediments in 27 test excavations within the East Kaka‘ako and

In general, the wetland sediments were documented as variations of brown and gray silty clays, sandy clays, clay loams, and black silt loam peat layers at or near the water table. The wetland sediments ranged from 0.78 mbs to 2.38 mbs. The wetland sediments generally contained organic material, freshwater snail shells and/or marine shells.

-artifact classification, and malacology were conducted on artifacts, charcoal, and/or sediment samples collected from the Kewalo wetlands. Hammatt (2013) details the results from these analyses as follows:

A single piece of volcanic glass debitage (Acc. # 189-H-1) was collected from SIHP # -6636. It was found in the T-189 Stratum IIb bulk sediment sam

Pollen analysis on six samples from T-191 and T-207 indicated that the wetland sediments in these two test excavations represent sedge marshland. ‘Aheahea likely grew along the drier margins of the wetlands. The presence of Acacia pollen in the uppermost samples from T-191 and T-207 indicated that koa trees grew in the vicinity. The pollen record from T-207 suggested that the marsh environment in this area grew drier during the time period represented by the three column samples.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 236

A decreasing concentration of Cyperaceae (sedge) pollen appeared to correspond with increasing quantities of Poaceae (grass) and Cheno-am (‘aheahea) pollen. As the marsh became drier, ferns became more abundant. Microscopic charcoal was also present in the uppermost samples in T-191 and T-207.

Taxa analysis of seven charcoal samples collected from wetland sediments (Stratum IIb) in T-189 identified two native species: hao (cf. Rauvolfia sandwicensis), and ‘a‘ali‘i (cf. Dodonaea viscosa), and one Polynesian- introduced species kukui (cf. Aleurites moluccana). In addition, were several unidentified woods, a temperate hard wood, and a Palm (cf. Aracaceae) also was identified, however, its variety was not determined. [Hammatt 2013:5:366–369]

Malacological analysis was conducted on freshwater and brackish water snails. The analysis identified estuarine, strandline, and shoreline-dwelling species ( ,

sp., and B. gracilis), which is not unusual for a coastal area. The presence of M. tuberculata indicated a permanent freshwater or brackish-water environment, typical of marshlands. The uppermost sample contained two historically introduced species (Physa sp. and P. duryi), suggesting the wetland was extant well into the nineteenth and perhaps twentieth centuries.

Artifacts were collected from SIHP # -6636 and date from the late 1800s to early 1900s, and include two bottle glass fragments, a milled 2 by 4 wood plank, one mold-blown glass bottle, three milled wood fragments, a brick (made between 1886 and 1918), pressed wood, and rusted metal. [Hammatt 2013:5:401]

Hunkin et al. (2013), during an archaeological inventory survey for the proposed Walgreens Kapi‘olani Redevelopment project, documented SIHP # -6636. The Kewalo wetlands were documented in all 15 test excavations and thus extrapolated the SIHP # -6636 boundaries to include the entire project area. Although no peat (humic) material was observed, evidence of A horizon soil formation was documented in three test excavations. Isolated historic material was observed and the general characteristics of the wetland sediments were described. The wetlands were observed to underlie historic and modern fill deposits. Hunkin et al. (2013) characterized the wetland sediment as “darker, organically enriched clays that contained decomposing rootlets and reed vegetation remnants” (Hunkin et al. 2013:115). SIHP # -6636 is described further:

The former wetlands and associated features (e.g., berms, ponds, and cultural pits) are buried and their surroundings have been completely altered by historic and modern development. In some locations, they exist only as remnants, have been significantly disturbed, or have been truncated. [Hunkin et al. 2013:123]

Mintmier et al. (2013) encountered the SIHP # -6636 wetland sediments within ten of the 13 test excavations, during an archaeological inventory survey within the Allen 1997 study area. These wetland sediments are described as very dark gray clayey silt. Mintmier et al. (2013) suggests that although the wetland sediments were not observed within three test excavations “it is likely that the three trenches that did not expose these soils would have revealed these soils had the water table not been encountered above these soils” (Mintmier et al. 2013:93). No additional testing was conducted of SIHP # -6636; however, the study did identify the extent of SIHP # -6636 within the project area.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 237

Pammer and McDermott (2014), during an archaeological inventory survey, identified the Kewalo wetlands (SIHP # -6636) within three trenches, Trenches 5–7. The wetland deposits (SIHP # -6636) were located beneath varying layers of imported fill, not unlike all previously documented locations. During the AIS, in-depth analysis of the land reclamation activities was conducted that narrowed the date for the in-filling of the Kewalo wetlands. The land reclamation activity conducted for the Kaka‘ako area was conducted primarily between 1920 and 1930. This suggests the majority of the Kewalo wetlands were buried under hydraulic fill, crushed coral, and the other various historic fills documented overlying SIHP # -6636.

The observed wetland sediments within the Pammer and McDermott (2014) study area consist of greenish gray silty clays with no evidence of a peaty upper boundary. Land snails and marine invertebrates were observed only in small quantities within samples collected during the study. Pammer and McDermott (2014) also targeted test excavations to encounter sand berms depicted on historic maps and were identified within five trenches (Trenches 2–4, 7, and 8), primarily located along the makai boundary of the project area.

Pammer and McDermott described SIHP # -6636 as follows:

SIHP # -6636 represents a large area wit -lying marshland, fishponds, and elevated berms. SIHP # -6636 is likely associated with wetland agricultural practices and salt pan operations. The current investigation has further identified the boundaries of the former wetland surface (SIHP # -6636) and the associated sand berms, though no additional evidence to support agricultural and salt pan land use was identified. [Pammer and McDermott 2014:108]

The observed wetland sediments within the Enanoria et al. (2015) archaeological monitoring study area for the proposed Walgreens Kapi‘olani Redevelopment project were encountered in all excavations that extended below fill layers. The project area is not located within the interpolated boundaries established by Hammatt 2013. The representative profiles concur with the determination by Hunkin et al. (2013) that the wetland sediment observed is a component of SIHP # -6636 and encompasses the entire project area. Due to the nature of many of the excavations, SIHP # -6636 could not be accurately analyzed or identified during much of the excavation activity. However, in excavations that were safe to enter and provided accurate stratigraphic sequences, SIHP # -6636 was found to be in concert with the findings of the previous studies.

SIHP # -6636 was observed in two of 24 test units (T-24 and T-30) within the Belluomini et al.

anirath and Shideler 2017), one feature was identified within Test Excavation 5 and designated as SIHP # -6636 Feature 2. Feature 2 was made up of basalt and coral boulders and may be a potential retaining wall. Three basalt rocks lie adjacent to a large coral boulder. It was found within the lower boundary of Stratum II at a depth of 104-110 cmbs.

Three features were identified during archaeological monitoring for the Board of Water Supply Kona Street 8-inch Water Main project including SIHP # -6636 Feature 3 through 5 (Enanoria et al. 2019b). SIHP # -6636 Features 3 and 4 consist of man-made berms associated with former agricultural practices located near the Pi‘ikoi Street and Kona Street intersection. Features 3 and 4


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 238

were identified beneath varying layers of fill, originating in an organically enriched peaty soil and terminating within naturally weathered buried wetland soils. The observed portion of the berm measured approximately 5.0 m long, with an unknown width, extending from 0.60–1.50 mbs.

SIHP # -6636 Feature 5 consists of a wetland deposit associated with Loko Kuwili, a traditional Hawaiian pond located within LCA 6450 awarded to Kaunuohua. General research of traditional

used primarily for aquaculture. Feature 5 was observed between 1.40 m and 1.62 m below the surface, capped by various overlying imported fill layers.

SIHP # -6636 was identified during the AIS for the Avalon Development on Kapi‘olani Boulevard within 17 of 22 test excavations (Blahut et al. 2018). Blahut et al. 2018 describe SIHP # -6636 as follows:

SIHP # -6636 was observed between 1.04–2.00 mbs, above natural marine deposits or the coral shelf. Generally, imported fill deposits associated with mid-twentieth century in-filling were overlying SIHP # -6636. In some cases, dryland berm material was observed below the imported fills and above the wetland deposits (T-2, T-3, T-5, T-7, T-11, and T-13). In the makai portions of the project area wetland deposits are more likely to be associated with fishponds, while in the mauka portions of the project area the wetlands are more likely to be associated with wetland agriculture (e.g., taro and rice). Stratigraphy associated with SIHP # -6636 was described as silty clay, silty clay loam, sandy clay, clay loam, sandy clay loam, and silt loam. These strata often contained numerous snails and organic material. [Blahut et al. 2019:280]

Thirty-five bulk sediment samples were collected and wet-screened yielding an abundance of aquatic snails and gravels, organic material including plant fibers, seeds, charcoal, and faunal bone. Nine pollen samples from a representation of discrete bulk and column samples were submitted to Bruce G. Phillips, M.S., of EcoPlan Associates for pollen and micro-charcoal analysis. Twenty-one types of pollen and spores were identified with Sedge, Cheno-Am, and grass pollen types. The larger pollen grains likely represent laiki (rice) and/or (sugarcane) activities.

6.1.2 Current study

The dimensions of SIHP # -6636 were expanded during AIS testing for the current project (see Figure 159 and Figure 160). SIHP # -6636 is within the eastern portion of the Kewalo wetlands, adjacent to the ‘ili of Kewalo, within the ‘ili of Miki and Pawa‘a (see Figure 17). Within the current project area, wetland remnants associated with SIHP # -6636 were identified in one of 19 test excavations within T-8. SIHP # -6636 was observed between 1.60–2.00 mbs, above natural marine deposits. Within T-8, SIHP # -6636 was capped by imported fill deposits associated with early to mid-twentieth century in-filling and a naturally occurring silt loam redeposited throughout the project area. The observed portion of wetlands during the current AIS represents the edge and/or transitional zone of the SIHP # -6636 Kewalo wetlands.

SIHP # -6636 consists of two sep

black clay loam ranging from 200 to 230 cmbs. Both strata contained many fine roots, sparse charcoal, and abundant fresh water snails.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 239

Background research suggests the buried wetland soils are likely associated with pre-Contact marshlands and utilized until the late 1920s. The marshlands were initially used for the cultivation of taro lo‘i and aquaculture during pre-Contact times, and were modified during post-Contact times for laiki (rice) and/or (sugarcane) activities.

Two 200 to 230 cmbs. These samples were collected and wet-screened for content at the CSH laboratory. Wet-screening of the bulk samples yielded an abundance of aquatic snails and gravels, Melampidae, Neritidae, crustacean, sea urchin, faunal bone, and organic material including plant fiber, seeds, and charcoal. material, indicating the human activity level in this area was mainly for habitation, agricultural, and aquacultural purposes.

CSH personnel submitted aquatic snail samples obtained from the wet-screening of one bulk sediment sample from T-8 to malacology specialist, Carl Christensen, Ph.D, for malacological analysis. The malacology results indicate the non-marine mollusks identified is typical of lowland wetlands ( ). The presence of the prehistorically introduced land snail gracile is consistent with pre-Contact and post-initial human settlement age (Christensen 2019).

CSH personnel submitted three pollen samples (Samples 1–3) from one test excavation (T-8) to Bruce G. Phillips, M.S., of BGP Consulting, LLC for pollen and micro-charcoal analysis. Pollen samples were selected from a representation of discrete bulk samples to target wetland deposits associated with SIHP # -6636, Kewalo wetland remnants. See Appendix C for the full report. Previous pollen analysis of SIHP # -6636 exhibited mostly sedge marshlands (Cyperaceae sp.) moving to grasslands (Poaceae sp.) with the eventual introduction of historically introduced species like kiawe (Allen 1997; Hammatt 2013; Morriss et al. 2013). The results from the current project area are largely as expected based on historic maps, photographs, and previous results. Awaiting pollen results.

6.1.3 Summary

SIHP # -6636 has been previously documented in various projects throughout the area. This summary compiles certain aspects of the analyses to provide a clear understanding of the Kewalo wetlands.

SIHP # -6636 consists of buried wetland deposits (known as the Kewalo wetlands), which were present at or very near the water table. The Kewalo wetlands were naturally deposited and formed on top of marine, primarily lagoonal, deposits and/or the coral shelf. In many studies, land reclamation activities that occurred in the 1920s and 1930s were some of the first depositional events atop the wetlands. These are characterized by hydraulic pump-dredged sandy clay fill layers capped by a crushed coral fill. In some instances, historic trash deposits directly overlie the wetlands and were utilized to initially in-fill the inundated areas, much like the dredged material. In the current project, the observed wetlands represent the edge and/or transitional zone of the Kewalo wetlands capped by naturally occurring silt loam redeposited throughout the project area.

Presently, historic and/or modern fill deposits of various origins and composition overlie the initial land reclamation deposits. The lagoonal and marine deposits that underlie the wetlands were extensively documented in Allen (1997). Allen (1997) suggests the wetlands are the result of gradual change of the environment on the Honolulu Plain. As sea levels receded, the Honolulu


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 240

Plain saw an accumulation of sand, creating a lagoonal environment. This lagoonal environment slowly developed into the Kewalo wetlands, until extensive land modification for salt pans, fishponds, lo‘i, etc. and the land reclamation activities of the early 1900s disturbed and capped the wetlands.

The soil described in previous studies as SIHP # -6636 is similar in texture, color, and content, although some variation does occur. The color of SIHP # -6636 deposits include brown, gray, and black with textures including silty clay, sandy clay, clay loam, and silt loam. The wetlands were often observed disturbed or truncated. Analyses such as palynology, malacology, radiocarbon

-identification have been conducted during various studies.

SIHP # -6636 includes five previously identified archaeological features. Feature 1 is a berm with aslater designated Feature 1 during the Hammatt 2013 study. Feature 2 was a potential retaining wall identified by Manirath and Shideler (2017). Features 3–5 were identified by Enanoria et al. (2018). Features 3 and 4 are man-made berms associated with agricultural practices and Feature 5 is a portion of Loko Kuwili associated with LCA 6450. No new features were identified during the current project.

SIHP # -6636, buried wetland deposits associated with the Kewalo wetlands, was previously assessed as significant per HAR §13-284-6 under significance Criteria a (associated with events that have made an important contribution to the broad patterns of our history) and d (have yielded,

2003:69). Hammatt 2013 found SIHP # -6636 does not have the integrity to convey its significance under Criterion a. The former land surface and its potential features (i.e., berms, ponds, and other cultural components) are buried and their surroundings have been completely altered by modern development since their time of construction and period of use. Accordingly, CSH recommended that this historic property maintains the integrity to support its historic significance only under Criterion d exclusively for its information potential. Pammer and McDermott 2014 concurred with the determination of SIHP # -6636 being significant solely under Criterion d. This was based on the potential to further understand the types of agricultural and aquacultural practices utilized and determine the boundaries of the Kewalo wetlands. The historic property retains integrity of location, materials, and association. This report concurs with this assessment.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 241

50-80-14-8801 FORMAL TYPE: ‘Auwai (ditch) FUNCTION: Water control NUMBER OF FEATURES: 1 AGE: Post-Contact (late nineteenth century) DIMENSIONS: 0.91 by 3.11 feet (28 by 95 cm) TEST EXCAVATIONS: T-6 TAX MAP KEY: [1] 2-3-018:56 LAND JURISDICTION: Cuzco Development USA LLC PREVIOUS DOCUMENTATION:

None

SIHP # -8801 is a newly identified historic property consisting of a former ‘auwai associated

property was observed within the southwestern portion of the project area (see Figure 160feature was observed within the western portion of T-6 consisting of a very dark grayish brown silty clay loam ranging from 145 to 173 cmbs. The earliest evidence of SIHP # -8801 is from an overlay of historic maps dating from 1891 (see Figure 16).

Background research and multiple historic maps dating to 1891 indicate a former ‘auwai was constructed when the area Miller known as Little Britain was occupied by General William (see Figure 15 through Figure 17). The former ‘auwai ran southeast to northwest near the central

was placed to target the ‘auwai but was unsuccessful. Historic maps indicate that by 1936 the northern portion of the project area was covered by a roadway and multiple dwellings where the ‘auwai had once been present (see Figure 27).

SIHP # -8801 was observed in one AIS test excavation, T-6. T-6 was placed between the northwestern and southeastern edges of the former ‘auwai observed on the overlay of an 1891 map. Evidence of SIHP # -8801 was observed within the western portion of T-6, consisting of a culturally modified remnant feature likely representing the eastern edge of the ‘auwai. The culturally modified remnant underlies a gravelly loam demolition layer likely from initial historical development during the early to mid-twentieth century (Stratum Ig), and above a sandy loam consisting of heavily compacted volcanic cinder known as caliche (Stratum III). The eastern edge of SIHP # -8801 was bounded by a naturally occurring pyroclastic event as a result of the decomposition of volcanic cinder from former Tantalus volcanic activity (Strata IIa and IIb). Strata IIa and IIb consist of a silt loam with pockets of volcanic cinder. Stratum IIb contains a higher concentration of volcanic cinder. SIHP # -8801 has a maximum height of approximately 28 cm and measures 95 cm long extending into the western wall and extends into the north and south walls for an unknown length. The western wall was not entirely excavated due to the presence of a water line.

In summary, SIHP # -8801 consists of an ‘auwai ditch remnant associated with late nineteenth century development. A portion of SIHP # -8801 was observed in T-6. According to historic maps,


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 242

this area was filled by the early twentieth century. SIHP # -8801 is assessed as significant under Hawai‘i State historic property significance Criterion d (have yielded, or may be likely to yield information important for research on prehistory or history) pursuant to HAR §13-284-6. The historic property retains integrity of location, materials, and workmanship. This assessment is based on the historic property’s potential to provide information on post-Contact land use (e.g.,


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 243

50-80-14-8802 FORMAL TYPE: Buried road FUNCTION: Transportation NUMBER OF FEATURES: 1 DIMENSIONS: 0.04 acres (0.01 hectares)AGE: Post-Contact (1920s through the 1950s) TEST EXCAVATIONS: T-4, T-7, T-11, and T-19 TAX MAP KEY: [1] 2-3-018:057 and 058 LAND JURISDICTION: Cuzco Development USA LLC PREVIOUS DOCUMENTATION:

None

SIHP # -8802 is a newly identified historic property consisting of a buried asphalt road associated with a former roadway (see Figure 160). According to historic maps and aerial photographs, SIHP # -8802 is related to a former road, Custer Street, which existed between 1920 through the early 1950s (see Figure 22 and Figure 29). SIHP # -8802 was observed within the western through the central portion of the project area. The site was identified between 34 and 108 cm below the ground surface between demolition fill deposits related to development between the early to late twentieth century. SIHP # -8802 was observed highest in the upland/mauka portion of the project area and deepest in the seaward/makai portion of the project area.

SIHP # -8802 was observed within four AIS test excavations, T-4, T-7, T-11, and T-19. T-4 was placed in the eastern portion of the project area. According to historic maps and aerialphotographs, T-4 was within an area with little disturbance. Evidence of SIHP # -8802 was observed throughout T-4 between 34 and 45 cmbs with a discontinuous crushed coral base course lens.

T-7 and T-11 were placed in the central portion of the project area targeting a former dwelling from Little Britain dating to 1891. According to historic maps and aerial photographs, T-7 and T-11 were in an area with heavy development ranging from Little Britain, road development, historic dwellings, and later the existing parking lot. Evidence of SIHP # -8802 was observed in the eastern portion of T-7 ranging from 90 to 108 cmbs. Evidence of SIHP # -8802 was observed in the northern portion of T-11 ranging from 82 to 95 cmbs.

T-19 was placed in the central portion of the project area targeting a former dwelling from Little Britain dating to 1891. According to historic maps and aerial photographs, T-19 was in an area with heavy development ranging from Little Britain, road development, historic dwellings, and later the existing parking lot. Evidence of SIHP # -8802 was observed discontinuously in the eastern portion of T-19 ranging from 34 to 108 cmbs.

In summary, SIHP # -8802 consists of a buried asphalt road associated with a former roadway, which according to an overlay of historic maps is related to Custer Street, which existed between 1920 through the early 1950s. A portion of SIHP # -8802 was observed within T-4, T-7, T-11, and T-19. SIHP # -8802 is significant under Hawai‘i State historic property significance Criterion d (has yielded, or is likely to yield information important for research on prehistory or history),


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 244

pursuant to HAR §13-284-6. The historic property retains integrity of location, materials, and workmanship. This assessment is based on the site’s association with the urban expansion of

SIHP # -8802 has provided, and can potentially provide additional information on


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 245

50-80-14-8803 FORMAL TYPE: Charcoal enriched A horizon FUNCTION: Former land surface NUMBER OF FEATURES: 3 AGE: Pre- to post-Contact DIMENSIONS: 0.01 acres (0.004 hectares) TEST EXCAVATIONS: T-17a TAX MAP KEY: [1] 2-3-018:058 LAND JURISDICTION: Cuzco Development USA LLC PREVIOUS DOCUMENTATION:

None

SIHP # -8803 is a newly identified historic property consisting of a black, buried, charcoal-enriched, silt loam A horizon (former land surface) containing three features (see Figure 160). SIHP # -8803 was documented during the current AIS within the central portion of the project area in T-17a ranging from 142 to 185 cmbs within Stratum IIIa. Documented features consisted of three pit features with indeterminate functions.

Four column samples were collected in the northeastern portion of T-17a within the southeast sidewall ranging from 107 to 151 cmbs. The column samples include Stratum IIa from 107 to 112 cmbs, Stratum IIb from 118 to 125 cmbs, Stratum IIIa from 130 to 138 cmbs, and Stratum IIIb from 145 to 151 cmbs.

Three pit features were identified within Stratum IIIa, SIHP # -8803 Features 1 through 3. A bulk sediment sample was collected from each feature. The bulk sediment samples were screened

(e.g., shell, bone, charcoal) and found to be comprised of charcoal.

-8803 Feature 1 is a pit feature of indeterminate function located within the northeastern portion of T-17a within the southeast sidewall (see Figure 92 and Figure 93). Feature 1 measured 20 cm wide and extends from 141 to 159 cmbs. Feature 1 originated within

from 141 to 159 cmbs. Screening of the sample yielded charcoal (0.7 g), Nertitdae (<0.1 g), Mytilidae (0.1 g), unidentified marine shell (<0.1 g), and an unidentifiable small mammal fragment (<0.1 g).

-8803 Feature 2 is a pit feature of indeterminate function located within the central portion of T-17a within the southeast sidewall (see Figure 93). Feature 2 measured 140 cm wide and extends from 135 to 177 cmbs. Feature 2 originated within Stratum IIb and terminated within Stratum IIIb. of the sample yielded charcoal (0.5 g), Neritidae (3.8 g), sea urchin (<0.1 g), and faunal bone including unidentifiable fish fragments (0.1 g).

-8803 Feature 3 is a pit feature of indeterminate function located within the southwest portion of T-17a within the southeast sidewall (see Figure 94). Feature 3 measured 70 cm wide


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 246

and extends from 140 to 175 cmbs. Feature 3 originated within Stratum IIb and terminated within

of the sample yielded charcoal (<0.1 g), Nertidae (1.3 g), crustacean (<0.1 g), and faunal bone (<0.1 g).

Two of three samples of charcoal were selected for submittal to Jennifer Huebert, Ph.D. at IARII for charcoal identification. The full charcoal report (Huebert 2019) is presented in Appendix D. Charcoal was selected from T-17a SIHP # -8803, Stratum IIIa, southeast wall, 130 to 138 cmbs and T-17a SIHP # -8803 Feature 1, 141 to 159 cmbs. The taxa identification served to aid in the selection of charcoal samples for radiocarbon dating by indicating which samples contained only pre-Contact species and by identifying the shortest-lived species.

Taxa Sample 2 was collected from SIHP # -8803, T-17a, southeast sidewall from a wet-screened sample collected between 130 to 138 cmbs. The sample was found to contain two identifiable taxa, two common native trees and shrubs, and two indeterminate hardwoods. The two taxa consist of endemic species including ( ) and Acacia koa (koa c. for radiocarbon dating due to its general stratum provenience.

Taxa Sample 3 was collected from SIHP # -8803, T-17a, Feature 1, between 141 to 159 cmbs. The sample was found to contain two identifiable taxa, two common native trees and shrubs, and one indeterminate monocot. The two taxa consist of endemic species including oahuense ( ) and Acacia koa (koa). Due to its provenience and quantity of charcoal, the

( ) sample was sent to Beta Analytic, Inc., for radiocarbon dating.

The samples of identified, short-lived endemic, Polynesian introduced, and an indeterminate hardwood collected from SIHP # -8803 were sent to Beta Analytic, Inc. of Miami, Florida for radiocarbon dating. CSH is awaiting the results.

In summary, SIHP # -8803 represents a pre- to post-Contact subsurface charcoal-enriched A horizon. Radiocarbon dates and taxa identification indicate the charcoal-enriched A horizon was utilized in both the pre-Contact and post-Contact periods. These indicators also identify the site as having permanent habitation and multiple use activity area functions. SIHP # -8803 is assessed as significant under Hawai‘i state historic property significance Criterion d (have yielded, or may be likely to yield information important in prehistory or history) pursuant to HAR §13-284-6. The historic property retains integrity of location and design. This assessment is based on the historic property’s potential to provide additional information on pre- and post-Contact land use activities


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 247

50-80-14-8804 FORMAL TYPE: Human skeletal remains FUNCTION: Human interment NUMBER OF FEATURES: 1 AGE: Unknown DIMENSIONS: 1.6 by 2.0 feet (50 by 64 cm) TEST EXCAVATIONS: T-11 TAX MAP KEY: [1] 2-3-018:058 LAND JURISDICTION: Cuzco Development USA LLC PREVIOUS DOCUMENTATION:

None

SIHP # -8804 was identified of T-11 located in the central portion of the project area (see Figure 160). The remains within T-11 represented a primary burial, in situ, and articulated with no prior disturbance except for the current disturbance from AIS activity. SIHP # -8804 was minimally exposed to determine orientation and completeness using a trowel, brush, and small wooden tools. The elements exposed included most of the left and right femora, the right proximal tibia, the left os coxa, and four vertebral bodies.

SIHP # -8804 extends from 158 to 172 cmbs. There was a slight discernible pit observed in the mauka (north) portion of SIHP # -8804 with minimal charcoal flecking noted. The body position appeared to be semi-extended with the skeleton in the supine position (facing upward) partially twisted on its right side, with the right leg crossing over the left leg, and both legs bending slightly at the knee. There was no visible flexion at the hips. No arm bones were observed but are believed to extend into the northwest wall along with the remainder of the upper body. SIHP # -8804 is oriented with the top of the head facing to the north and the feet pointing to the east. It is unknown which direction the face is oriented toward. There were no grave goods, grave markers, clothing remnants, or coffin remnants observed. The remains were in excellent condition with no previous breakage. The exposed portion of SIHP # -8804 represents approximately 15% of an individual, but the entire skeleton is assumed to be present, intact, in situ, and unexposed (Figure 163).

Based on the elements exposed, it was not possible to determine ancestry osteologically. The pubic symphysis was too coated in silty clay material to make an accurate age or sex assessment. Additionally, attempting to clean the pubic symphysis would have likely damaged the remains due to its unsupported position. The individual was determined to be an adult based on the complete fusion of the observed remains.

In consultation with SHPD staff Regina Hilo, preliminary burial treatment measures were conducted , Inc. The remains were covered with clean muslin and covered with sterile material with an approximately 1-inch thickness. Two plywood boards measuring 3 ft long, 1 ft wide, and 1/4-inch-thick were placed atop the sterile material and covered with additional sterile material until completely obscured. The top of the board measured 143 cmbs. The remainder of T-11 was then backfilled.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 248

Figure 163. Plan view of trench containing SIHP # -8804 (note areas of the remains are drawn as

incomplete due to only partial exposure


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 249

In summary, SIHP # -8804, human skeletal remains, is assessed as significant under Criterion d (have yielded or is likely to yield, information important for research on prehistory of history) for its archaeological information and Criterion e (have an important value to the Native Hawaiian people or to another ethnic group of the state due to its associations with cultural practices once carried out, or still carried out, at the property or due to associations with traditional beliefs, events or oral accounts these associations being important to the group’s history and cultural identity) because of its cultural value as human skeletal remains, pursuant to HAR §13-284-6. The historic property retains integrity of location, design, and materials.

Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: WAIKIKI 249 Consultation

AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 250

Section 7 Consultation 12 June 2018, a cultural descendants’ meeting was held at the project area at Evergreen

Adult Day Center (815 Ke‘eaumoku Street). Keli‘inoi, Mana Caceres, Kalehua (Brandy) Caceres, Makoa Caceres, Kama‘ehu Caceres, Hiehie Caceres, Kamana Caceres, and Bill Ha‘ole. Also in attendance were Lani Ma‘a Lapilio (Aukahi), Hallett Hammatt (CSH), Scott Belluomini (CSH), Brittany Enanoria (CSH), Carmen Delos Reyes (CSH), Wyeth Matsubara (Nan Inc.), Yulee Kim (Nan Inc.), Hinaleimoana Wong-Kalu and

During this meeting, the AIS testing plan was discussed for the Ke‘eaumoku Development project. The AIS trenches were placed to coincide with the construction plans and an overlay of the 1891 Monsarrat map of Little Britain per the meeting with SHPD on 19 April 2018.

this presentation was to introduce the proposed project.

The current AIS project and single burial find were 14 November 2018. The purpose of this presentation was to discuss the AIS findings and the next steps for the project.

Upon consultation with the SHPD, a burial notice for SIHP # -8804 was published in connection with the current project. The legal notice ran in the Honolulu Star-Advertiser on 27 February 2019, and 1 and 3 March 2019. The same public notice will also be published in the April 2019 issue of the monthly newsletter, Ka Wai Ola. The text of the public notices is provided below:

Public Notice for Honolulu Star Advertiser and Ka Wai Ola o OHA

Burial Notice –

(SIHP # 50-80-14-8804) was identified by Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc. in the course of an archaeological inventory survey related to the Ke‘eaumoku RedeTMK: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077.

Following the procedures of Hawai‘i Revised Statutes (HRS) Section 6E-43, and Hawai‘i Administrative Rules (HAR) Chapter 13-300, these remains are considered previously identified. Based on the context of the finds, they are over 50 years old and most likely Native Hawaiian.

Land Commission Award (LCA) within this ‘ili is LCA 2057 awarded to Keanui.

The project proponent is Cuzco Development U.S.A., LLC. The contact person is Wyeth Matsubara, Nan Inc., 636 Laumaka Street, Honolulu, Hawai‘i 96819 [Tel: (808) 842-].

The decision to preserve in place or relocate the previously identified human

State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) and any recognized lineal and/or

Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: WAIKIKI 249 Consultation

AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 251

cultural descendants, per the requirements of HAR Section 13-300-33. Appropriate treatment shall occur in accordance with HAR Section 13-300-38.

All persons having any knowledge of the identity or history of these human remains are requested to immediately contact Ms. Regina Hilo, SHPD Burial Sites Specialist, at 601 Kamokila Boulevard, Room 555, Kapolei, Hawai‘i 96707 [Tel: (808) 692-8015, Fax: (808) 692-8020, Email: [email protected]].

All interested parties shall respond within thirty (30) days of this notice and file descendancy claim forms and/or provide information to the SHPD adequately demonstrating lineal descent from this specific burial or cultural descent from ancestors who once resided, or are buried in, the same ahupua‘a or district.

The consultation process is not complete and is currently on-going.

Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: WAIKIKI 249 Summary and Interpretation

AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 252

Section 8 Summary and Interpretation At the request of Nan, Inc., CSH has prepared this AISR for the Ke‘eaumoku Development

p Ahupua‘a, Honolulu District, , TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077. The redevelopment plan will involve the demolition of the existing structures on the property and the development of two new residential condominium towers with a commercial component consisting of retail, eating and drinking establishments, offices and other commercial uses. Redevelopment will consist of the entire site with no basement structure, and towers are planned to be about 400 ft tall and 44 floors high. The proposed residential towers will include 964 condominium residences, with ancillary common area uses and about 88,000 sq ft of commercial uses, and 1,571 parking stalls. Approximately 37,150 sq ft of open space including a useable park/plaza area will be open for public use.

The subsurface testing plan originally consisted of 12 subsurface test excavations (T-1 through T-12). The subsurface testing plan was modified per the request of SHPD in a meeting held on 19 April 2018 for an additional four test excavations (T-1 through T-16). Due to a previously identified burial find within T-11, an additional three trenches were completed around the boundaries of T-11 to determine the possibility of any additional burials or burial clusters in the immediate vicinity (T-17 through T-19). T-17 was abandoned due to the presence of an active sewer line that broke during excavation activity. Immediately west of T-17, avoiding the route of the sewer line, T-17a was excavated in place of T-17.

All trenches were excavated by a backhoe excavator to sterile material observed between 46 m and 240 mbs to a base depth ranging from 182 m to 240 mbs.

Four newly identified historic properties were identified including an ‘auwai, a buried road, a charcoal-enriched A horizon, and human skeletal remains. The ‘auwai or ditch remnant is designated as SIHP # -8801. The buried road surface is likely related to a former road dating between 1920 and 1943 and is designated as SIHP # -8802. The charcoal-enriched A horizon was only identified in T-17a and is designated as SIHP # -8803. The human burial was identified within the southern portion of T-11 and is designated as SIHP # -8804.

The general observed stratigraphy from open trenching primarily consists of imported and locally procured fill deposits (Stratum I) and a naturally occurring silt loam deposit. Some areas in the central portion of the project area contained a buried A horizon with minimal charcoal flecking. In the southernmost portion of the project area, a wetland deposit was observed. These observations are consistent with the USDA soil data for the project area and its vicinity (Foote et al. 1972). All excavations were backfilled after completion of documentation.

Naturally occurring silt loam was encountered throughout the entire project area (T-1 through T-19). This deposit consists contains volcanic cinder that progressively contained a higher concentration near the base of excavation.

Based on testing, the stratigraphy observed throughout the project area indicated the northern portion of the project area appeared to be relatively undisturbed within the silt loam deposits in comparison to the central and northern portions of the project area. The silt loam deposits were observed at lower depths in the central and southern portions of the project area suggesting a gradual sloping effect. The sloping effect relates to a change in elevation representing a transitional

Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: WAIKIKI 249 Summary and Interpretation

AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 253

zone from the southern portion of the project area’s edge of the SIHP # -6636 Kewalo wetlands to the northern dryland areas, which was less occupied in pre-Contact and historic times.

The central portion of the project area displayed the most evidence of land use, containing four newly identified historic properties which all provide the earliest evidence of post-Contact human activity in the area.

The southern portion of the project area represents a low-lying area containing SIHP # -6636 Kewalo wetlands, which was utiltized from pre-Contact times through the late 1940s when the area was filled in for development with redeposited silt loam observed throughout the project area.

Artifacts recovered from the project area include an array of glass and ceramic artifacts with a wide date range from the late nineteenth to mid-twentieth century. Most artifacts recovered came from strata associated with the initial stages of historic development within the project area or activities related to the former dwellings that stood on the landscape between the early to mid-twentieth century. However, some artifacts were found in fill deposits related to construction of the existing parking lot. The assemblage most likely represents a twentieth century deposit.

Three samples of charcoal were submitted for taxa identification. Samples were selected from a discreet feature, SIHP # -8803 Feature 1, and associated bulk sediment sample, SIHP # -8803, from a charcoal-enriched A horizon, and from a bulk sediment sample from the SIHP # -6636 wetlands. The taxa identification served to aid in the selection of charcoal samples for radiocarbon dating by indicating which samples contained only pre-Contact species and/or by identifying the shortest-lived species. The taxa identification results found both endemic and Polynesian-introduced trees and no typical European introduced species such as kiawe (Pros ). The absence of historically introduced species within all three samples suggests SIHP # -8803 and SIHP # -6636 were utilized primarily in the late pre-Contact to early post-Contact time period.

Following taxa identification, three charcoal samples identified as endemic or Polynesian-introduced species collected from SIHP #s -8803 and -6636 were submitted to Beta Analytic, Inc. for radiocarbon dating.

Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: WAIKIKI 249 Significance Assessments

AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 254

Section 9 Significance Assessments Historic property significance is assessed based on the five State of Hawai‘i historic property

significance criteria. To be considered significant, a historic property must possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and/or association and meet one or more of the following broad cultural/historic significance criteria (in accordance with HAR §13-284-6):

a. Be associated with events that have made an important contribution to the broad patterns of our history;

b. Be associated with the lives of persons important in our past;

c. Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, represent the work of a master, or possess high artistic value;

d. Have yielded, or is likely to yield, information important for research on prehistory or history; or

e. Have an important value to the native Hawaiian people or to another ethnic group of the state due to associations with cultural practices once carried out, or still carried out, at the property or due to associations with traditional beliefs, events or oral accounts—these associations being important to the group’s history and cultural identity.

new historic properties were identified within the current project area. Table 28 lists the historic properties along with their significance/eligibility assessments and mitigation recommendations. These significance recommendations are included in this AISR for the review and concurrence of the SHPD.

SIHP # -6636, buried wetland deposits associated with the Kewalo wetlands, was previously assessed as significant per HAR §13-284-6 under significance Criteria a (associated with events that have made an important contribution to the broad patterns of our history) and d (have yielded, or is likely to yield information important for research on prehistory o2003:69). Hammatt 2013 found SIHP # -6636 does not have the integrity to convey its significance under Criterion a. The former land surface and its potential features (i.e., berms, ponds, and other cultural components) are buried and their surroundings have been completely altered by modern development since their time of construction and period of use. Accordingly, CSH recommended that this historic property maintains the integrity to support its historic significance only under Criterion d exclusively for its information potential. Pammer and McDermott 2014 concurred with the determination of SIHP # -6636 being significant solely under Criterion d. This was based on the potential to further understand the types of agricultural and aquacultural practices utilized and determine the boundaries of the Kewalo wetlands. The historic property retains integrity of location, materials, and association. This report concurs with this assessment.

SIHP # -8801 consists of an ‘auwai ditch remnant associated with late nineteenth century development. A portion of SIHP # -8801 was observed in T-6. According to historic maps, this area was filled by the early twentieth century. SIHP # -8801 is assessed as significant under Hawai‘i State historic property significance Criterion d (have yielded, or may be likely to yield

Cultu

ral S

urve

ys H

awai

‘i Jo

b Co

de: W

AIK

IKI 2

49

Si

gnifi

canc

e Ass

essm

ents

AIS

R fo

r the

TMK

s: [1

] 2-3

-018

:052

–060

, 074

, 075

, and

077

25

5

Tabl

e 28

. Arc

haeo

logi

cal h

isto

ric p

rope

rty in

tegr

ity, s

igni

fican

ce, a

nd m

itiga

tion

com

mitm

ents

50

-80-

14

Tes

t E

xcav

atio

n Fo

rmal

Typ

e/

Des

crip

tion

Inte

grity

Si

gnifi

canc

e

Miti

gatio

n C

omm

itmen

ts

Location

Design

Setting

Materials

Workmanship

Feeling

Association

SIH

P #

-880

1 6

‘Auw

ai/fo

rmer

ditc

h

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N

N

d A

rcha

eolo

gica

l mon

itorin

g SI

HP

# -8

802

4, 7

, 11,

19

Bur

ied

road

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N

N

d

Arc

haeo

logi

cal m

onito

ring

SIH

P #

-880

3 17

a C

harc

oal-e

nric

hed

A h

oriz

on

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

N

d A

rcha

eolo

gica

l mon

itorin

g

SIH

P #

-663

6 8

Bur

ied

wet

land

soil

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N

N

d A

rcha

eolo

gica

l mon

itorin

g SI

HP

# -8

804

11

Hum

an sk

elet

al re

mai

ns

Y

Y

N

Y

N

N

N

d an

d e

Bur

ial t

reat

men

t

Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: WAIKIKI 249 Significance Assessments

AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 256

information important for research on prehistory or history) pursuant to HAR §13-284-6. The historic property retains integrity of location, materials, and workmanship. This assessment was based on the historic property’s potential to provide information on post-Contact land use (e.g.,

SIHP # -8802 consists of a buried asphalt road associated with a former roadway, which according to an overlay of historic maps is related to Custer Street, which existed between 1920 through the early 1950s. A portion of SIHP # -8802 was observed within T-4, T-7, T-11, and T-19. SIHP # -8802 is significant under Hawai‘i State historic property significance Criterion d (has yielded, or is likely to yield information important for research on prehistory or history), pursuant to HAR §13-284-6. The historic property retains integrity of location, materials, and workmanship. This assessment is based on the site’s association with the urban expansion of

-8802 has provided, and can potentially provide additional information on

SIHP # -8803 represents a pre- to post-Contact subsurface charcoal-enriched A horizon. Radiocarbon dates and taxa identification indicate the charcoal-enriched A horizon was utilized in both the pre-Contact and post-Contact periods. These indicators also identify the site as having permanent habitation and multiple use activity area functions. SIHP # -8803 is assessed as significant under Hawai‘i state historic property significance Criterion d (have yielded, or may be likely to yield information important in prehistory or history) pursuant to HAR §13-284-6. The historic property retains integrity of location and design. This assessment is based on the historic property’s potential to provide additional information on pre- and post-Contact land use activities

SIHP # -8804, human skeletal remains, is assessed as significant under Criterion d (have yielded or is likely to yield, information important for research on prehistory of history) for its archaeological information and Criterion e (have an important value to the Native Hawaiian people or to another ethnic group of the state due to its associations with cultural practices once carried out, or still carried out, at the property or due to associations with traditional beliefs, events or oral accounts these associations being important to the group’s history and cultural identity) because of its cultural value as human skeletal remains, pursuant to HAR §13-284-6. The historic property retains integrity of location, design, and materials.

Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: WAIKIKI 249 Project Effect and Mitigation Commitments

AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 257

Section 10 Project Effect and Mitigation Commitments

Project Effect The proposed project will potentially affect five significant historic properties (SIHP #s -6636

through -8804) identified within the project area. The project specific-effect determination is “effect, with agreed upon mitigation commitments” pursuant to HAR §13-284-7. The recommended mitigation measures will reduce the project’s potential effect on significant historic properties.

Mitigation Commitments The agreed upon mitigation commitments for the Ke‘eaumoku Development Project consists

of archaeological monitoring (a form of data recovery) and burial treatment.

Archaeological monitoring of all ground-disturbing activities is agreed upon for the entire -site archaeological monitoring will be conducted to identify and appropriately

document any additional exposures of SIHP #s -6636, -8801, -8802, -8803, and any newly identified historic properties that may be encountered during construction. An archaeological monitoring plan meeting the requirements of HAR §13-279-4 will be submitted for SHPD review and acceptance prior to the commencement of construction activity.

A burial treatment plan meeting the requirements of HAR §13-300-33 will be completed for the SIHP # -8804 related to human interment. This burial treatment plan will incorporate

ervation in place or relocation of the previously identified human remains.

Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: WAIKIKI 249 References Cited

AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 258

Section 11 References Cited Abbott, Isabella Aiona

1984 Limu. An Ethnobotanical Study of Some Seaweeds. Pacific Tropical Botanical Garden, Lawa‘i, Kaua‘i.

Abbott, R. Tucker and S. Peter Dance 1990 . American Malacologists, Melbourne, Florida.

2002 Machine Cut Nails and Wire Nails: American Production and Use for Dating 19th-

Century and Early 20th-Century Sites. Historical Archaeology 36(4):66–88. Society for Historical Archaeology, Germantown, Maryland.

Adams, Bradley and Pam Crabtree 2012 Academic Press, Reed Elsevier, New York.

Allen, Jane 1997 Paleoenvironmental Investigations in the Kewalo Wetland: Geoarchaeological

Environmental and Energy Services, Inc., Honolulu.

2011

O‘ahu TMK: [1] 2-3-04, 05, 07, 09, 10, 13, 14, 17, 18, 22, 35, 36, 38, and 41. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i.

American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 2015 The 19th

Electronic document, https://academic.oup.com/asj/article/35/7/878/2589184 (accessed 17 December 2018).

1994 The Archaeological Investigation of Inadvertently Discovered Human Remains at

lo, Waikiki, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i. International Archaeological Research Institute, Inc., Honolulu.

1940 Hawaiian Mythology. Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut.

2019 Draft Archaeological

O‘ahu TMK: [1] 2-3- Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i.

2016

-1-044:003, 039, and 044. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 259

Berry, Bob 2003 Porcelain Insulator Page. Electronic document,

https://www.insulators.info/porcelain/ (accessed 18 December 2018).

1847 A Residence of Twenty-One Years in the Sandwich Islands. Praeger Publisher, Hartford, Connecticut.

Bishop, S.E. 1884 Portion of map of Honolulu, Kewalo Section. Registered Map 1090. Hawai‘i Land

Survey Division, Department of Accounting and General Services, Honolulu. Bishop Museum

2010, 2019 Hawaiian Ethnobotany Online Database. Available online at http://data.bishopmuseum.org/ethnobotanydb/ethnobotany.php?b=list&o=1.

2019 Draft Archaeological

[1] 2-3-016:003, 004, and 008. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i.

2018 Historic Glass Bottle Identification & Information Website. Electronic document, www.sha.org/bottle/index.htm.

Boelen, Jacobus 1988

Hawai‘i in 1828. Hawaiian Historical Society, Honolulu. Borget, Auguste

1838 Honolulu Salt Pans, near Kaka‘ako [Sketch]. Reprinted in Hawai‘i Looking Back: An Illustrated History of the Islands, by Glen Grant, Bennett Hymer, and Bishop Museum Archives, 2000. Mutual Publishing, Honolulu.

2012

-3-039:011. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i.

2013

Community Honolulu (Kona) District, Island of O‘ahu, TMK: [1] 2-3-022:049 and 062. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i.

Carskadden, Jeff, Richard Gartley, and Elizabeth Reeb 1985

Stone, and Glass Marbles in Historic Archaeology. Archaeology 3:86–Historic Archaeology Papers p

.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 260

Carskadden, Jeff and Richard Gartley 1990 A Preliminary Seriation of 19th-Century Decorated Porcelain Marbles. Historical

Archaeology 24:55–69. Chamberlain, Levi

1957 Sixty-Society for the Year 1956. Hawaiian Historical Society, Honolulu.

Chong, Douglas Dai Lunn 1998 An Ethnic Community

-1935. Waipahu Tsoong Nyee Society, Waipahu, Hawai‘i. Christensen, Carl C.

2019 Analysis of Nonmarine Mollusks from Archaeological Excavations: Island of [1] 2-3-018:060),

Test Excavation T-8. Carl C. Christensen, Ph.D., Honolulu. Cider Press Media

2017 Oh Marbles! Electronic document, https://www.imarbles.com/historyofmarbles .php (accessed 10 December 2018).

Clark, John R.K. 2011 Hawaiian Surfing. Traditions from the Past. University of Hawai‘i Press, Honolulu.

Clark, Stephan D. and Dennis Gosser 2005 Subsurface Archaeological Inventory Survey of TMK 2-3-003:075, 085, and 086

Pacific Consulting Services, Inc., Honolulu.

Clorox Company 2018 Bottle Guide. Electronic document, https://www.thecloroxcompany.com/who-we-

are/our-heritage/bottle-guide/ (accessed 6 December 2018). Cook, James P.

1784

Discovery...in the years 1776, 1777, 1779, and 1780. Cadell, London.

Covington, R. 1881

Department of Accounting and General Services, Honolulu. Day, A. Grove

2004 History Makers of Hawai‘i. Mutual Publishing, Honolulu. Dini, David A.

2006 Some History of Residential Wiring Practices in the U.S. Electronic document, https://www.scribd.com/doc/18355180/Electrical-Wiring-History (accessed 18 December 2018).

Dodge, F.S. 1891

of Accounting and General Services, Honolulu.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 261

Drennan, Trisha M. 2006 Archaeological Assessment -Acre Parcel at the

Hawai‘i [TMK: (1) 2-4-007: 001]. Scientific Consultant Services Inc. Honolulu. 2007 An Archaeological Inventory Survey of Two Parcels Measurin

a, ‘Ili of Kewalo, Kona (Honolulu) District, Island of O‘ahu, Hawai‘i [TMK: (1) 2-4-05: 26 and 27]. Scientific Consultant Services Inc. Honolulu.

Eisenberg, Jerome M. 1981 A Collector’s Guide to Seashells of the World. Crescent Books, New York.

Elliott, Rex R. and Stephen C. Gould 1988 Hawaiian Bottles of Long Ago: A Little of Hawaii’s Past. Hawaiian Service,

Honolulu. Ellis, William

1827 Narrative of a Tour through Hawaii, or Owhyhee: With Observations on the Natural History of the Sandwich Islands, and Remarks on the Manners, Customs, Traditions, History, and Language of their Inhabitants. Printed for B.J. Holdsworth, London.

Emmert, Paul 1850 Sketch. Hawaiian Historical Society, Honolulu. Reprinted in Hawai‘i Looking

Back: An Illustrated History of the Islands, by Glen Grant, Bennett Hymer and Bishop Museum Archives, 2000. Mutual Publishing, Honolulu.

2019a Draft Archeological Monitoring

TMK: [1] 2-3-006:017. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i. 2019b

Street: 8-O‘ahu TMK: [1] 2- Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i.

2015

-3-021:008, 009, and 010. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i.

Esh, Kelley S 2006

Kona District, O‘ahu Island (TMK: 2-3-06, 07, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 35, & 38 and 2-4-03, 04, 11 & 12). Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 262

Farley, Gina M., Scott A. Belluomini, and Matt McDermott 2019

Honolulu (Kona) District, O‘ahu TMK: [1] 2-3-038:001 Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i.

Fike, R.E. 1987

Peregrine Smith Books, Salt Land City, Idaho. Fitzpatrick, Gary

1986 Editions Limited, Honolulu.

2009 Phase 1 Boulevard from Avenue to Ward Avenue, Kamake‘e

to Ala Moana Boulevard TMK: [1] 2-1-044, 049, [1] 2-3-001-005, 007, 008, 010, 015, 016, 021, 022, 032, 034-036, 038-041. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i.

1972 Survey of the Islands of Kauai, O‘ahu, Maui, Molokai and Lanai. State of Hawai‘i.

D.C. Forbes, David

1992 -1941. Honolulu Academy of Arts, Honolulu.

Fornander, Abraham 1917 History of Kualii. Fornander Collection of Hawaiian Antiquities and Folklore.

II. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. Giambelluca, T.W., Q. Chen, A.G. Frazier, J.P. Price, Y.-L. Chen, P.-S. Chu, J.K. Eischeid, and D.M. Delparte

2013 Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society -316, doi: 10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00228.1. University of Hawai‘i

ography.hawaii.edu. Gilman, Gorman D.

1903 Streets of Honolulu in the Early Forties. In Hawaiian Almanac and Annual for 1904, edited by Thomas G. Thrum. Thos. G. Thrum, Honolulu.

Gish, Elton 2018 - ators. Electronic

document, https://www.r-infinity.com/index.htm (accessed 18 December 2018). Godden, Geoffrey A.

1964 Herbert Jenkins, London.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 263

Google Earth 2013

online at www.google.com/earth.html.

2000 Hawai‘i Looking Back: An Illustrated History of the Islands. Mutual Publishing, Honolulu.

Griffin, Jessica 2015 Electronic document,

https://oldmainartifacts.wordpress.com/2015/11/25/ponds-extract-company-new-york-city-ny/ (accessed 11 December 2018).

Griffin, P. Bion, D.T.P. Keene, and Joseph Kennedy 1987 Kaka‘ako: Prediction of Sub-Surface Archaeological Resources, Kaka‘ako

-Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey.

2006a

Kona District, O‘ahu Island (TMK: [1] 2-3-38: 001 and 2-3-40:005, 007, 009, 011, 014, 016, & 018). Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i.

2006b District, O‘ahu TMK (1) 2-3-39:11.

Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i. 2008

-3-04:73, 2-3-05:27, 2-3-06:14 and 2-3-07:2. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i.

2013 Honolulu High-

-2, 1-5, 1-7, 2-1, 2- Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i.

1995 Archaeological Sub-surface Inventory Survey at the Hawai‘i Convention Center

Site, Waikiki, Kona District, O‘ahu. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i.

1996 Kona District, O‘ahu (TMK 2-3-35:001). Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i.

2018 -3

-3-018:052– 060, 074, 075, and 077. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 264

1972 Native Planters in Old Hawaii: Their Life, Lore, and Environment. Bishop Museum

Bulletin 23. Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum, Honolulu. M.L. and O.A. Bushnell

1980 Molokai. Franciscan Herald Press, Chicago.

1914 the

Territory of Hawaii. Bulletin Publishing Company Honolulu.

1922 .

1930 erritory of Hawaii to the Secretary of the Interior. D.C.

1915 Cases Decided in the Court of the Territory of Hawaii. Honolulu Star-

Bulletin, Honolulu.

1887 Photograph State Archives, Honolulu.

1930 Aerial photograph of Kewalo Basin. Hawai‘i State Archives, Honolulu. 1931 Honolulu.

p Key (TMK) 2014 Tax Map Key: [1] 2-3-018. Hawai‘i TMK Service, Honolulu.

1887 Article. Hawaiian Gazette, 5 July.

2008 -Acre Ala Moana

TMK: [1] 2-3-38: 001 and [1] 2-3-40: 005, 007, 009, 011, 014, 016, & 018. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i.

1999 Historic Preservation Review – Request for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP),

Continuing Care Retirement Community Building at the Corner of Sheridan and Makaloa Streets, Honolulu, Kona, O‘ahu for TMK 2-3-8 Subdivision 1998 (74). State Historic Preservation Division, Honolulu.

-Smith 1996 Electronic document,

(accessed 14 December 2018).


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 265

1923 Article. Honolulu Advertiser, 11 March:12 1928 Article. Honolulu Advertiser

2008a Ka Mo‘

articles in 1905–1906. Awaiaulu Press, Honolulu. 2008b

Nogelmeier, translator. Awaiaulu Press, Honolulu.

2019 249 [WIDL 1834]. International Archaeological Research Institute, Inc., Honolulu.

2013 Introduction to Terminology Describing Commercially Produced Ceramics. In

-1940, edited by Rebecca Allen, Julia E. Huddleson, Kimberly J. Wooten, and Glenn J. Farris, pp. 55–63. Society of Historical Archaeology, Special Publication Series. No. 11. Germantown, Maryland.

2013

of O‘ahu TMK: (1) 2-3-021:008, 009, and 010. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i.

1992 Archaeological Monitoring and Inventory Survey, Harbor Court (Ka‘ahumanu

-80-14-2456, Nu‘uanu, District, Island of O‘ahu, Hawai‘i. Public Archaeology Section Applied Research Group, Bishop Museum, Honolulu.

1959 Bishop Museum

Press, Honolulu. ipika

1862 Kalia. Ka Hoku o ka , 12 April:4. Ka Nupepa Kuokoa

1862 Kalia. , 22 March:3. 1862 Kalia. , 10 April:4. 1864 Kalia. , 23 April:2. 1867 Kalia. , 19 January:1. 1925 Kalia. , 9 April:5.

1991 . Bishop

Museum Press, Honolulu.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 266

Kanahele, George S. 1995 . Queen Emma Foundation,

Honolulu. Kay, E. Allison

1979 Hawaiian Marine Shells. Section 4. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. Keliipio, L.D.

1900 Hawaiian Fish Stories and Superstitions. M.K. Nakuina, translator. In Hawaiian Annual and Almanac for 1901. Thos. G. Thrum, Honolulu.

Kotzebue, Otto von 1817 , by

Gary L. Fitzpatrick 1986, pp. 48–49. Editions Limited, Honolulu. 1821 f

-east Passage Undertaken in the Years 1815-1818. Longman,

Kovel, Ralph and Terry Kovel 1986 Kovels’ New Dictionary of Marks: Pottery & Porcelain 1850 to the Present. Crown

Publishers, Inc., New York.

2013

O‘ahu, TMK: (1) 2-3- e). Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i.

LaPasse, Lt. Joseph de 1855 Plan du Mouillage [Anchorages] d’Honolulu. Map by Lt. Joseph de LaPasse. In

, by Gary L. Fitzpatrick, 1986. Editions Limited, Honolulu.

Larrison, G. 1916 Honolulu’s Future Water Supply. In Hawaiian Almanac and Annual for 1917.

Thomas G. Thrum, Honolulu. Lehner, Lois

1988 Collector Books, Paducah, Kentucky.

Lindsey, Bill 2014 Historic Glass Bottle Identification & Information Website. Accessed at

http://www.sha.org/bottle.

1989 Chinese of Early Tucson Historic Archaeology from the Tucson Urban Renewal Anthropological Papers of the University of Arizona No. 52. University of

Arizona Press, Tucson, Arizona.

2015 . Electronic document, www.sha.org/bottlesandmore.htm


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 267

2018 The Bewildering Array of Owens-Illinois Glass Co. Logos and Codes. Electronic document, .

Lockhart, Bill and Bill Porter 2005 The Dating Game: Tracking the Hobble-Skirt Coca-Cola Bottle. Electronic

document, https://sha.org/bottle/pdffiles/coca-cola.pdf (accessed 3 January 2019).

2016 Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. Electronic document, https://sha.org/bottle/pdffiles/Hazel-Atlas.pdf (accessed 17 December 2018).

Lockhart, Bill, Beau Schriever, Carol Serr, and Bill Lindsey 2015 Electronic document,

https://sha.org/bottle/pdffiles/GlassContainersCo.pdf (accessed 10 December 2018).

2013 Electronic document, https://sha.org/ bottle/pdffiles/AnchorHocking.pdf (accessed 11 December 2018).

2010 Alexandria Archaeology Laboratory Reference Book. Lexicon and Illustrated

Glossary. Manirath, Lisa and David W. Shideler

2017 Arch-3-021:037 and 039.

Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i. Maples, Trina C.

1998 Dating Guide to Historic Artifacts. 13:106–

Wickliffe, Kentucky. Maryland Archaeological Conservation Laboratory

2002 Diagnostic Artifacts in Maryland. Electronic document, http://www.jefpat.org/ diagnostic/HowToCiteThisWebsite.html

McAllister, J. Gilbert 1933 Archaeology of Oahu. Bishop Museum Bulletin 104. Bishop Museum Press,

Honolulu. McCurdy, To

2008

District, Island Of O‘ahu TMK: [1] 2-3-021:027. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i.

McElroy, Windy K. 2010 Archaeological Monitoring for the Makaloa-Sheridan Sam’s Club/Wal-Mart

TMKs: (1)2-3-016:009 and 043. Windy K. McElroy, Honolulu.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 268

2007 History of Meadow Gold, Hawaii’s Diary. Meadow Gold Company. Available

online, www.lanimoo.com/about/history.cfm

2012 -4-011:008,

009, 010, 011. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i. Millar, Jim

1988 The Handbook of Hawaiian Machine Made Soda Bottles. Soda Mart, Goodletssville, Tennessee.

Miller, 2000 Telling Time for Archaeologists. Northeast Historical Archaeology 29(1):1–22.

The Council for Northeast Historical Archaeology (CNEHA), Binghamton University, State University of New York. Binghamton, New York.

Mintmier, Melanie A., Paul Titchenal, Katharine A. Shiroma, and Stephan D. Clark 2013

TMK: (1) 2-1-044: 001, 032, 047, 048. Pacific Consulting Services, Inc., Honolulu. Monahan, Christopher M.

2006 Archival and Field Research on the Archaeology and History of an 7.0-Honolulu, Island of O‘ahu, Hawai‘i [TMK: (1) 2-4-007: 001]. Scientific Consultant Services Inc., Honolulu.

Monsarrat, M.D. 1891 Map of Honolulu. Registered Map 1572. Hawai‘i Land Survey Division,

Department of Accounting and General Services, Honolulu. 1891 Map of Honolulu. Registered Map 1910. Hawai‘i Land Survey Division,

Department of Accounting and General Services, Honolulu. 1920 Map of Honolulu. Hawai‘i Land Survey Division, Department of Accounting and

General Services, Honolulu.

2013 istrict, O‘ahu Island, TMK

[1]-2-3-038:001 Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i.

2014 Electronic document, http://www.wimuseum.org/illinois-electric-porcelain-company-photos/ (accessed 18 December 2018).

Munsey, Cecil 1970 Illustrated Guide to Collecting Bottles. Hawthorn Books, Inc., New York.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 269

2010 Codd (Marble-In-The-Neck) Soda-Water Bottles, THEN and NOW! Electronic document, https://sha.org/bottle/pdffiles/coddarticleMunsey.pdf (accessed 10 December 2018).

Myers, Adrian T. 2010 Telling Time for the Electrified: An Introduction to Porcelain Insulators and the

Electrification of the American Home. Technical Briefs in Historical Archaeology 5:31-42.

Nakamura, Barry 1979 The Story of Waikiki and the Reclamation Project. M.A. thesis, University of

Hawai‘i, Honolulu. Native Register

1847 Native Register of Kuleana Claims to Quiet Land Titles in the Hawaii Islands (1847-53), vol. 3. State of Hawai‘i Archives, Honolulu.

Native Testimony 1847 Native Testimony of Kuleana Claims to Quiet Land Titles in the Hawaii Islands

(1847-53), vol. 10. State of Hawai‘i Archives, Honolulu. Nayton, Gaye

1992 Applying Frontier Theory to a Western Australian Site: The Problem of Chronological Control. Australasian Historical Archaeology 10:75–91. Australasian Society for Historical Archaeology.

Ober, Gerald 1810 Fragments of Hawaiian

His , Press, Honolulu.

2003

Kewalo, Kona District, O‘ahu (TMK 1-2-3-10:28, 48, 50, 52-56). Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i.

2004

-3-04:73, 2-3- -3-2-3-07:2). Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc. Kailua, Hawai‘i.

2010

t, Makiki -4-011:008, 009,

010, 011. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc. Kailua, Hawai‘i.

2006 Archaeological Inventory Survey for the 116-Unit Kaio‘o Multifamily

TMK: (1) 2-6-012:037-044, 055-058. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 270

2004 Archaeological Monitori

-3-3, 4, 7, 9, 10, 15, 16, 21, 22, 35, 39, 40, & 41). Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i.

Old Glass Bottles and Items of Antiquity 2014 Lysol [Lehn & Fink, Inc]. Electronic document,

http://oldglassbottles.blogspot.com/2014/05/lysol-lehn-fink-inc.html (accessed 7 December 2018).

Olsen, Stanley J. 1964 Mammal Remains from Archaeological Sites: Part 1 - Southeastern and

Southwestern United States. Peabody Museum Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

2014 Honolulu (Kona) District, O‘ahu TMK: [1] 2-3-038:001

Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i Paquette, Jack K.

1994 The Glassmakers: A History of Owens- Trumpeting Angel Press, Toledo.

Park, Valerie and Sara L. Collins 2008 -Disturbing Activities in Connection

with the State Civil Defense Disaster Warning and Communications Devices, -3-009:001 &

2-3-030. Pacific Consulting Services, Inc., Honolulu. Paske-Smith, M.

1936 Early British Consuls in Hawaii. Mid-Pacific Magazine -December 49, No. 4, 1936. Honolulu.

1983 Bishop Museum Special

Publication No. 71. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. T. Mookini

1974 Place Names of Hawaii. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu. Pultz, Mary Anne (editor)

1981 and Observations about the Island of Oahu. Press Pacifica, Ltd., Kailua, Hawai‘i.

Randall, Mark E. 1971 Early Marbles. Historical Archaeology 5:102–105. Society for Historical

Archaeology, Germantown, Maryland. Ritchie, Neville A.

1986 Nineteenth Century: A Study of Acculturation, Adaptation, and Change. PhD


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 271

Ross, Douglas 2012 Late Nineteenth and Early Twentieth-Century Japanese Domestic Wares from

British Columbia. In Ceramics in America, edited by Robert Hunter, pp. 2–29. Chipstone Foundation. Electronic document, http://academia.edu/2450069/ Late_Nineteenth-_and_Early_Twentieth Century_Japanese_Domestic_Wares_ from _British_Columbia.

Runyo 2012

-3-007:026 & 049. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i.

2007

K): (1) 2-3-022, 023 & 032. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i.

2011

Kaka‘ako, Honolulu (Kona) District, Island of O‘ahu TMK: [1] 2-3-006:017. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i.

Samford, Patricia 2002a Canton Porcelain. Electronic document, http://www.jefpat.org/diagnostic/Post-

Colonial%20Ceramics/Less%20Commonly%20Found/CantonPorcelain/index-cantonporcelain.html

2002b Edged Earthenwares. Electronic document, http://www.jefpat.org/diagnostic/Post-Colonial%20Ceramics/Shell%20Edged%20Wares/index-shelledgedwares.html

Sanborn Map Company 1914

Archives, Honolulu. 1927

Archives, Honolulu. 1950 F

State Archives, Honolulu. Schmid, Elisabeth

1972 Atlas of Animal Bones for Prehistorians, Archaeologists and Quaternary Geologists. Elsevier Publishing Company, Amsterdam-London-New York.

1968 The Saga of the Sandwich Islands -Tahoe Publishing Company,

Crystal Bay, Lake Tahoe, Nevada.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 272

2019

--3-018:052– 060, 074, 075, and

077. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i. Sholin, Carl E. and Thomas S. Dye

2012 Center at 1812 Avenue, Kona District, O‘ahu Island, TMK: (1) 2–3–034:027. T.S. Dye & Colleagues, Archaeologists, Inc., Honolulu.

Sinoto, Aki 2000 -

Area, Kalia, Makiki, Kona, O‘ahu (TMK 2-3-16:9, 12, and 42). Aki Sinoto Consulting, Honolulu.

Sinoto, Aki and Jeffrey Pantaleo 2002 -Mart/Sam’s Club

-3-16:9, 12, and 42). Aki Sinoto Consulting, Honolulu.

Sisson, Septimus 1953 The Anatomy of the Domestic Animals. W.B. Saunders Company, Philadelphia.

Smith, Marc 1989 -3-39:19). State

Parks Archaeologist, Honolulu. Sprague, Roderick

2002 China or Prosser Button Identification and Dating. Historical Archaeology 36(2):111–127. Society for Historical Archaeology, Germantown, Maryland.

1970

Islands in the Years 1822, 1823, 1824, and 1825. Reproduction of 1830 edition (missionary).University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu.

Stone, Scott C.S. 1983 Honolulu, Heart of Hawai‘i. Continental Heritage Press, Inc., Tulsa,

Sutton, Mark Q. and Brooke S. Arkush 2002 Archaeological Laboratory Methods: An Introduction. Kendall Hunt, Dubuque, IA.

[good info on nails] Thrum, Thomas

1883 Retrospect of the Year 1883. In Hawaiian Almanac and Annual for 1884. Thomas G. Thrum, Honolulu.

1891 Indigenous Hawaiian Woods. In Hawaiian Almanac and Annual for 1892. Thomas G. Thrum, Honolulu.

1896 Hawaiian Epidemics. In Hawaiian Almanac and Annual for 1897. Thomas G. Thrum, Honolulu.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 273

1904 The Sandal-Hawaiian Almanac and Annual for 1905. Compiled by Thos. G.

Thrum. Thomas G. Thrum, Honolulu. 1915 Retrospect for 1915. In Hawaiian Almanac and Annual for 1916. Thomas G.

Thrum, Honolulu. 1919 Retrospect for 1919. In Hawaiian Almanac and Annual for 1920. Thomas G.

Thrum, Honolulu. 1923 Hawaiian Salt Making. In Hawaiian Almanac and Annual for 1924. Thomas G.

Thrum, Honolulu.

2009

Honolulu District, O‘ahu Island TMK: [1] 2-3-004:075, 076. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i.

Titcomb, Margaret 1979 Native Use of Marine Invertebrates in Old Hawaii. University of Hawaii Press,

Honolulu. Tod, Jack

1977 A History of the Electrical Porcelain Industry in the United States. Jack Tod, Phoenix, Arizona.

Tome, Guerin and Robert L. Spear 2008 -Acres of Land in Makiki, Ili of

‘i [TMK (1) 2-4-006: 017 and 018]. Scientific Consultant Services Inc., Honolulu.

1971 Bottle Makers and their Marks. Thomas Nelson, Inc., Nashville and New York.

2005 Addendum to an Archaeological Inventory Survey for the Ko‘olani Condominium

- 3-04:73, 2-3-05:27, 2-3-06:14, 2-3-07:2). Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc., Kailua, Hawai‘i.

1927 Waikiki coast a

http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/coasts/erosion/oahu/ mosaics.php (accessed 10 May 2012).

1952


1970


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 274


2012 -

Coastal Erosion Group. http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/coasts/erosion/oahu/ mosaics.php (accessed 10 May 2012).

U.S. Army War Department 1919 U.S. Army War Dep

Quadrangle. USGS Information Services, Denver, Colorado. 1936

Quadrangle. USGS Information Services, Denver, Colorado. 1943 U.S. Army War Department terrain map, Honolulu Quadrangle. USGS

Information Services, Denver, Colorado. U.S. Climate Data

2019 U.S. Climate Data website. Available online, https://www.usclimatedata.com/ USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture)

2001 Soil Survey GeographiNatural Resources Conservation Service. Fort Worth, Texas. http://www.ncgc.nrcs.usda.gov/products/datasets/ssurgo/.

U.S. Department of the Interior 1920 1920.

USGS (U.S. Geological Survey)

1953 Honolulu USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle. USGS Information Services, Denver, Colorado.


1959 USGS Waikiki Coast aerial photograph (UH MAGIS). USGS Information Services, Denver, Colorado.


1978 Services, Denver, Colorado.


Vancouver, George 1798 A of Discovery to the North Pacific Ocean, and Round the World

Performed in the Years 1790-1795. Robinson and Edwards, London. Vicks

2018 Electronic document, https://vicks.com/en-us/vicks-history (accessed 17 December 2018).


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 275

1990 Manual of the Flowering Plants of Hawaii . Bishop Museum Special

Publication 83. University of Hawaii Press and Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. Waihona ‘Aina

2000 . Electronic document, http://www.waihona.com (accessed 1 August 2010).

Wall, Walter A. 1887 Map of Honolulu and Call Number G4384.H6 1887 .W3, Library of

Congress Geography and Map Division, Washington, D.C. 1893 Map of Honolulu. Registered Map 1690. Hawai‘i Land Survey Division,

Department of Accounting and General Services, Honolulu. Weiland, Jonathan

2009 A Comparison and Review of Window Glass Analysis Approaches in Historical Archaeology. Technical Briefs in Archaeology

Welker, John and Elizabeth Welker 1985 -1925.

Antique Acres Press, Ivyland, Pennsylvania. Whitten, David

2009 Glass Factory Marks on Bottles. Electronic document, http://www.myinsulators .com/glass-factories/bottlemarks.html

2016, 2018 rs. Electronic document, https://www.glassbottlemarks.com/chesebrough-manufg-co-vaseline-jars/ (accessed 14 November 2018).

Wilson Okamoto & Associates, Inc. 1998 Final Environmental Statement for the Block J

Honolulu, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i. Honolulu

1980 M. West Publishers, Fulton, California.

Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: WAIKIKI 249 Appendix A

AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 276

Appendix A LCA Documentation Royal Patent 02341 to Miller, William

Grant Number(LG) 02341 Source Book: 12

Grantee: Miller, William Acreage: 2.97 Acs

Ahupuaà Year 1857

District: Kona Cancelled False

Island Oahu TMK

Miscellaneous

Vol. 11, pps. 371-372

PATENT

Patent, makes known unto all men, that he has for himself and his successors in office, this day granted and given, absolutely, in Fee Simple unto William Miller, his faithful and loyally

as follows:

Commencing at the North angle at second post of General Miller’s wire fence and runing [running]

South 21 1/2° West 12 chains 98 links along land purchased by General Miller from M. Kekuanaoa then

South 26° West 4 chains 32 links past [pass?] by along General Miller’s land and partly along land belonging to the King, then

South 50° East 2 chains 63 links along Government land, then North 25° East 2 chains 46 links, then

North 6° East 3 chains 55 links, then

North 12° East 2 chains 25 links, then

North 40° East 1 chain 6 links, then

North 28° East 2 chains 10 links then

North 88° East 59 links then


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 277

North 7° East 7 chains along the taro patches of Natives proprietor to the point of Commencement.

Private rights reserved [Native rights reserved?]

[Page 372]

[Note:] See original survey 2 A 3 R 35 P = 2.97 Acres

[Acres, Roods, Perches]

Containing Two Acres two roods & Twenty six acres [sic] Acres, more or less, excepting and reserving to the Hawaiian Government, all mineral or metallic mines of every description.

To have and to hold the above granted Land in Fee Simple, unto the said William Miller, his Heirs and Assigns forever, subject to the taxes to be from time to time imposed by the Legislative Council equally, upon all landed Property held in Fee Simple.

In Witness whereof, I have hereunto set my Hand, and caused the Great Seal of the Hawaiian Islands to be affixed, at Honolulu, this 20 day of March, 1857.

Kamehameha Kaahumanu

[Land Patent Grant No. 2341, Miller, William, King Street, Honolulu Ahupuaa, District of


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 278

1, 1848 Land Grant No. 8241, Ioane Ii, Honolulu, February

1, 1848 N.R. 512-517v5

ahupuaà, Waipio, Ewa, is from the mountain to the sea, however, there are no ku lands situated within it because of the Moì - that is up to the Moì. The ones with the right to live there are listed below.

Pawaa. This Ìli was gotten after the /Battle of/ Nuuanu by my makuas, from Kamehameha I, and these lands and other lands on other islands are held. The reason they, and I, got them, was by the actions of Kamehameha I and Kamehameha II, but they have been divided at this time and separated by the Government and the Moì -- nine lands for them and two for me. Below are the names of the people living on this land.

[No.] 3. A small lot claim, in Honolulu, is leased to Dr. Epener and Dr. Rooke; perhaps Samisona has the occupancy at this time for the remaining years. My retainers lived there in 1837 and in 1841, perhaps, it was leased as aforesaid.

Here are the names of the people living on the land of Waipio in Ewa: Name of the Man, Moò, Loì, House lot, House(s), Children Ulakaipo, 1 Moò, 1 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 3 Children

M. Luheluhe, 1 Moò, 4 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child Nahua, 1 Moò, 7 Loì, 1 House lot, 2 House(s), 3 Children Luaka, 1 Moò, 5 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 2 Children Kalauli, 1 Moò, 9 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 2 Children Nahea, 1 Moò, 4 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 2 Children

Kaakau, widow*, 1 Moò, 3 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 2 Children

Manoha, 1 Moò, 7 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 3 Children

Neliikuhoe, 1 Moò, 3 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 3 Children

Makaloka, 1 Moò, 9 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Puakea, 1 Moò, 6 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Keahekahuole, 1 Moò, 7 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Kaapaahili, 1 Moò, 10 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Puhipaka, 1 Moò, 4 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Kalili, 1 Moò, 4 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Kahuainana, 1 Moò, 3 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Pi, 1 Moò, 7 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 279

Poikeo, 1 Moò, 3 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Kula, 1 Moò, 2 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Paumano, 1 Moò, 3 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Kupehe, widow*, 1 Moò, 7 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child Pohano, 1 Moò, 3 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Hana, 1 Moò, 1 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Kaiki, 1 Moò, 3 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Kamaka, 1 Moò, 4 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 4 Children

Niau, w, 1 Moò, 5 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Kupokii, 1 Moò, 3 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 3 Children

Nau w, 1 Moò, 5 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Manuwa, 1 Moò, 8 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Paakiki, 1 Moò, 5 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Uma, 1 Moò, 8 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 4 Children

Kuaana, 1 Moò, 7 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 4 Children

Kuhanapilo, 1 Moò, 1 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Kauhi, 1 Moò, 2 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Kakaukola, 1 Moò, 2 Loì, 1 House lot, 2 House(s), 4 Children

Kauhiohewa, 1 Moò, 1 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Luukia, wahine, 1 Moò, 2 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Hanaiuka, 1 Moò, 3 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Nawahinelawaia, 1 Moò, 1 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 4 Children

Leoiki, 1 Moò, 10 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 2 Children

Kaanaana, 1 Moò, 2 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 4 Children

Hinaumai, 1 Moò, 9 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 4 Children

Kaholohua, 1 Moò, 9 Loì, 1 House lot, 5 House(s), 4 Children

Homa, 1 Moò, 9 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 4 Children

Kaheau, 1 Moò, 9 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 4 Children

Kaluluahi, 1 Moò, 9 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 4 Children

Paamua, 1 Moò, 9 Loì, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 4 Children

Kamauli, 1 Moò, 9 Loì, 1 House lot, 2 House(s), 4 Children

Lio, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 2 House(s), 4 Children


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 280

Naokiai, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 2 House(s), 4 Children

Kailihao, 1 Moò , 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 4 Children

Kaulewaiwi, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 3 Children

Kalaepoha, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 3 Children

Hepa, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 3 Children

Kamakahi, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s) Children, 3

Kaualelehuna, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 3 Children

Halelaau, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Kaneakauhi, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Keahale, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 2 House(s), 3 Children

Kahuluhulu, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 2 House(s), 3 Children

Kaimoleihonua, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 2 House(s), 3 Children

Naiapapa, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 2 House(s), 3 Children

Kaleiku, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 2 House(s), 3 Children

Kailio, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 2 House(s), 3 Children

Kahili, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 3 Children Haikoi, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 3 Children Uoo, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 3 Children

Kanealu, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 3 Children

Kaioe, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 2 Children

Kuhoomalana, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 2 Children

Uao, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 2 Children

Kaliiwahinui, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 2 Children

Poupou, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 2 Children

Palekaluhi, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Kahakai, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Kaopuaua, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Naniu, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Kawaihae, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Ukeke, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Kaihumua, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 281

Mokunui, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 2 Children

Kauleeku, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 2 Children

Humehume 1 moò, 2 kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 2 Children

Moku 1 Moò, 5 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Kaia, 1 Moò, 2 Kula, 1 House lot, 2 House(s), 1 Child

Kaliikanakaole, 1 Moò, 5 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Kapule, 1 Moò, 5 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Kaneaumoana, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Nahokunui, 1 Moò, 5 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Kailua, 1 Moò, 5 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Kapela, 1 Moò, 5 Kula, 1 House lot, 2 House(s), 3 Children

Holomoana, 1 Moò, 2 Kula, 1 House lot, 2 House(s), 2 Children

Kaumiumi, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 2 Children

Nahona, 1 Moò, 2 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 4 Children

Puou, 1 Moò, 3 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 4 Children

Koleaka, 1 Moò, 3 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 4 Children

Kaluwahinenui, 1 Moò, 1 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Alele, 5 Moò, 5 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 1 Child

Kuhiwahiwa, 1 Moò, 5 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 3 Children

Keawekolohe, 1 Moò, 2 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 3 Children

Makahiwahiwa 1 Moò, 2 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 3 Children

Kekahili 1 Moò, 2 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 2 Children

Lokai, 4 Moò, 4 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 2 Children

Kaheananaui, 1 Moò, 2 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 2 Children

Ainui, 1 Moò, 2 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 2 Children

Uma , 1 Moò, 2 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 2 Children

Kahoowaha, 1 Moò, 2 Kula, 1 House lot, 1 House(s), 2 Children

Land Two, Pawaa is the name, at Waikiki. Names of people living on this land:

mokuahanui, Kaolei, Napohaku, Naukana, Mu, Kua, Nakaikuaana, Kaaiahua.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 282

These lands are my share from the Government, therefore, two thirds only remain to us and the people. The explanation is in the Mahele Book.

I am, respectfully, your obedient ANE II

/*The initials w, k, m, are shown, which I take to mean wahine, kane, make, or widow/

The fourth of the land claims is at Waiakimi, with three loì and a kula in Honolulu land, in Kalawahine. It was transferred to the wahine of Ioane Ii from the year 1830 until this time.

F.T. 554v3

No. 8241, Ioane Ii

Keekapu, sworn, says she knows the Kuleana of Ii in "Kalawahine." Honolulu Aina. It consists of some Kalo patches in one piece with a small piece of kula adjoining.

It is bounded:

Mauka by the land of Kaauhauhula

Makai by L. Haalilea & Kekuanaoa

Claimant received this land from his father, Kalimahauna, in the time of Kinau, and has held it ever since. There is not dispute to this claim.

Witness knows the House Lot in "Manamana" Honolulu, claim

by Ii. It is bounded:

Mauka by Ala Beretane

Kaluahinenui's lot Makai by Kalaiheana & Pahana's lots Ewa side by Hinau's lot.

This lot was anciently a waste place and was taken up by claimant in the time of Kinau & he has held possession of it ever since, without dispute.

K. Kapaakea, sworn, says he knows this house lot, and confirms in full the testimony given by Keekapu.

N.T. 148v10

No. 8241, Ionae Ii

This distribution is correct and the lands are for John Ii. Permission has been granted to present this before the land officers who settle claims.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 283

(Sign) Kamehameha

Royal Palace, 27 January 1848

[Award 8241; R.P. 5699; Kalawahine Honolulu Kona; 1 ap.; .77 Ac.; no R.P. Pawaa Kona; 1 ap.;

2.59 Acs; R.P. 5704; Pawaa Kona; 5 ap.; 250.8 Acs; R.P. 5732; Waipio Ewa; (ahupuaà);1 ap.; 20,546 Acs; See other names for other claims]


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 284

LCA No. 100 F. L. to Kekaula, Transcription No. 100 F. L., Kekaula, Honolulu, March 26, 1852 N.R. 763-764v3

Greetings to you all: Here is my claim for taro ponds and five ki‘opua/ponds for raising

I am, with thanks, KEmark

Land Commissioners, Honolulu

N.T. 304v10 No. 100 FL, Kekaula 25 July 1853

Uma, sworn, I have seen his land secion in Kalia, Waikiki of two ponds, 5 fish ponds, 1 patch, house site and a pasture in one section of land.

Mauka, Wm. Miller’s land

Waialae, Makai, Honolulu, Government land

Land from his parents at the time of Kamehameha I. I did know in the same way [Award 100

F.L., R.P. 7553; Kalia Waikiki Kona: 1 ap.: 8.5 Acs]


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 285

LCA No. 101 F.L. to Kaluaoku, Transcription No. 101 F.L., Kaluaoku N.R. 764v3

The Land Commissioners of the Hawaiian Islands, Greetings: I hereby /apply for/ quiet title of my land claim in Kalia kai. There are two ponds and three small ki‘opua pond /for young fish/ and one lo‘i. This is a very old right, from the makuas to the present, With thanks,

Witness: S.P. Kalama, Honolulu 24 March 1852

N.T. 339v10

No. 101 FL, Kaluaoku, 21 February 1854

Paoo, sworn. Kaluaoku’s claim is in Kalia, Waikiki, of two ponds, three fry deposits (ponds), and one patch in two pieces.

Section 1 – Two ponds and three fry ponds. Mauka, Kekaula’s land

Waialae, Government land

Makai and Honolulu, Government land.

Section 2 –

Mauka, Waialae, Makai, Kekaula’s land Honolulu, the tenants’ group patch.

Land received at the time of Kamehameha I from his parents, they had received it from their parents long ago.

Kaluaoku died in 1853 of small pox, his daughter, Pale, has this land now. Kuaoi, sworn, I have seen this claim just as Paoo has related here.

(Note: There are no awards for these two claims on the Books of the Commissioners, FL

[Award 101 F.L.: (no award): R.P. 3781: Kalia Waikiki Kona: 2 ap.: 3.3 Acs: Royal Patent without award]


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 286

LCA No. 566 to John Mitchiner


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 287


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 288

Cl. No. 566 John Mitchiner

This claim is for a piece of land situated in Kapawaa, Waititi. The claimant states that he received it from the King in the year 1831 – and that he has ever since occupied it in peace, after erecting several buildings upon it.

The evidence taken by the Commission confirms the preceding statement as to length of possession and the absence of counter claims, with the exception of one of the small lintegral part of this lot by [his ?] wife Kaioe in which she asserts a separate right but to which, in the judgement of the Board, after a hearing of the parties and inspection of the place, she has no individual claim. We therefore award to the clamant John Mitchiner, a freehold estate in this lot less than allod [allodial ?] which he may commute for a fee-simple estate in the same in accordance with the law.

The metes and bounds of the above awarded lot are setforth in the following survey A.T. [?] Turner Sur[veyor]

Commencing at S angle running N 30o E 2 Ch 73 lks along land belonging to Kauliokamoa then N 50o W & N 40o E [?] along land of Wm Hodge then N 50o W 26o 7 lks along land of Thupplebeen- then S 34o W 29 lks bagae [?] S 58o E 2 Ch. 98 lks along land of Gen Miller to point of Commencement. Area 6/10 acre.

The Figure is consistent in noting the lands of General Miller to the southwest and northwest, lands of Thupplebeen [?] to the northeast, the land of William Hodges as contiguous at the east corner, and lands of a Kauliokamoa to the southeast.


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 289

LCA No. 3134 to William


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 290

Cl. No 3134 William Hodge

According to the testimony before the Commission this lot was originally obtained from Mailau in time of Kinau by the claimant’s Grantor, a Lascar [a sailor from India or Southeast Asia] named in the claim Serang and known by the native name of Pokini.who gave it to the present claimant on payment of some undefined Consideration. In the year 1841. And he has ever since held the place in peace. As defined in the annereds [?] survey of its metes and bounds by A.T. TurnerWe award to the clamant William Hodge a freehold title in the above described lot, less than allodial which he may commute as the law directs for a fee- simple tittle [?]

Commencing at E angle and running N to 6o West 3 ch. 1.8 lks along Kauliokamoa’s lands, then S 38o W 3 ch. 51 lks. Along land of John Ii. Kauwa, Ford and John Mitchenier then N 59o

W 2 ch 11 lks along land of John Mitchenier, J. Kauliokamoa

The survey map mis consistent with a few notable points:

Between the west corner of Hodge’s land contiguous with John Mitchenier’s land and King Street (an area shown as “government land on the 1884 Bishop map there are three land owners: Ford, Kawaa, and John Ii,

King Street is known as the “Alanui Makai” (Beretania St logically being the Alanui Mauka),

And the land holdings of Kauliokamoa to the southeast and southwest of Hodge’s lan appear sizable.

Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: WAIKIKI 249 Appendix B

AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 291

Appendix B Malacological Analysis Awaiting final results.

Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: WAIKIKI 249 Appendix C

AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 292

Appendix C Pollen and Micro-charcoal Analysis

Awaiting final results.

Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: WAIKIKI 249 Appendix D

AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 293

Appendix D Wood Taxa Identification


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 294


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 295


AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 296

Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: WAIKIKI 249 Appendix E

AISR for the

TMKs: [1] 2-3-018:052–060, 074, 075, and 077 297

Appendix E Radiocarbon Analysis Awaiting final results.


APPENDIX VII

SUN STUDY

SUN STUDY02/01/2019

KEEAUMOKU DEVELOPMENT

6

SPRING EQUINOX

SUMMER SOLSTICE

8:00 AM 10:00 AM 12:00 PM 2:00 PM 4:00 PM

8:00 AM 10:00 AM 12:00 PM 2:00 PM 4:00 PM

KING ST

LIONA ST

RYCROFT ST

KEEA

UM

OKU

ST

AHAN

A ST

KANNU ST

KING ST

LIONA ST

RYCROFT ST

KEEA

UM

OKU

ST

AHAN

A ST

KANNU ST

KING ST

LIONA ST

RYCROFT ST

KEEA

UM

OKU

ST

AHAN

A ST

KANNU ST

KING ST

LIONA ST

RYCROFT ST

KEEA

UM

OKU

ST

AHAN

A ST

KANNU ST

KING ST

LIONA ST

RYCROFT ST

KEEA

UM

OKU

ST

AHAN

A ST

KANNU ST

KING ST

LIONA ST

RYCROFT ST

KEEA

UM

OKU

ST

AHAN

A ST

KANNU ST

KING ST

LIONA ST

RYCROFT ST

KEEA

UM

OKU

ST

AHAN

A ST

KANNU ST

KING ST

LIONA ST

RYCROFT ST

KEEA

UM

OKU

ST

AHAN

A ST

KANNU ST

KING ST

LIONA ST

RYCROFT STKE

EAU

MO

KU S

T

AHAN

A ST

KANNU ST

KING ST

LIONA ST

RYCROFT ST

KEEA

UM

OKU

ST

AHAN

A ST

KANNU ST

2 0 9

6

FALL EQUINOX

WINTER SOLSTICE

8:00 AM 10:00 AM 12:00 PM 2:00 PM 4:00 PM

8:00 AM 10:00 AM 12:00 PM 2:00 PM 4:00 PM

KING ST

LIONA ST

RYCROFT ST

KEEA

UM

OKU

ST

AHAN

A ST

KANNU ST

KING ST

LIONA ST

RYCROFT ST

KEEA

UM

OKU

ST

AHAN

A ST

KANNU ST

KING ST

LIONA ST

RYCROFT ST

KEEA

UM

OKU

ST

AHAN

A ST

KANNU ST

KING ST

LIONA ST

RYCROFT ST

KEEA

UM

OKU

ST

AHAN

A ST

KANNU ST

KING ST

LIONA ST

RYCROFT ST

KEEA

UM

OKU

ST

AHAN

A ST

KANNU ST

KING ST

LIONA ST

RYCROFT ST

KEEA

UM

OKU

ST

AHAN

A ST

KANNU ST

KING ST

LIONA ST

RYCROFT ST

KEEA

UM

OKU

ST

AHAN

A ST

KANNU ST

KING ST

LIONA ST

RYCROFT ST

KEEA

UM

OKU

ST

AHAN

A ST

KANNU ST

KING ST

LIONA ST

RYCROFT STKE

EAU

MO

KU S

T

AHAN

A ST

KANNU ST

KING ST

LIONA ST

RYCROFT ST

KEEA

UM

OKU

ST

AHAN

A ST

KANNU ST

2 0 9


APPENDIX VIII

ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS & PUBLIC FISCAL ASSESSMENT

``

ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS & PUBLIC FISCAL ASSESSMENT PROPOSED KEEAUMOKU DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Keeaumoku Street, between Liona and Rycroft Streets Honolulu, Island of Oahu, Hawaii CBRE, Inc. File No. 18-251LA-2512

Nan Chul Shin Wyeth M. Matsubara NAN INC. 636 Laumaka Street Honolulu, Hawaii 96819

wwww.cbre.com/valuation

VALUATION & ADVISORY SERVICES

1003 Bishop Street, Suite 1800 Honolulu, HI 96813

T 808-521-1200 F 808-541-5155

www.cbre.com

March 5, 2019 Mr. Nan Chul Shin Mr. Wyeth M. Matsubara NAN INC. 636 Laumaka Street Honolulu, Hawaii 96819 RE: Market Study and Economic Impact Analysis

of the Proposed Keeaumoku Development Project Fronting the diamond head (easterly) side of Keeaumoku Street Between Liona and Rycroft Streets in the Ala Moana Neighborhood

Honolulu, City & County of Honolulu, Hawaii CBRE, Inc. File No. 18-251LA-2512 Gentlemen:

At your request, we have completed an economic impact analysis and public fiscal (cost/benefit) assessment of the proposed Keeaumoku Development Project to be located on some 3.53 acres (12 contiguous tax map parcels) on the diamond head frontage of Keeaumoku Street, between Liona and Rycroft Streets, in the Ala Moana neighborhood of Honolulu, Island of Oahu.

The project will be a multi-use, multi-high-rise tower undertaking, which will contain residential units (workforce/affordable and market-priced), commercial bays (restaurant, retail and service/office), parking garage, amenities and open space. It will be built in a single phase which is anticipated will require some three years for approvals, site work and vertical construction. The developer anticipates full absorption of all inventory within three-years from commencement of pre-sales, or within one-year of project completion.

The master plan selected for development is a two-tower project as shown on the site plan below. The development includes 964 total residential units (87% market-priced, 13% affordable-priced), 88,000 Gross Square Feet of commercial floor space, 1,571 parking stalls, and 37,150 square feet of open space.

Mr. Nan Chul Shin Mr. Wyeth M. Matsubara March 5, 2019 Page 2

Proposed Keeaumoku Development Project Master Site Plan

Identified as First Division Tax Map Key 2-3-18 Parcels 52 to 60, 74, 75 & 77, the contiguous parcels are designated "BMX-3 Community Business Mixed-Use District". The site is level and at street-grade with comprehensive utility system access. The proposed Keeaumoku Development Project site is within the "Urban District" on State Land Use Maps, designated as "Commercial Emphasis – Mixed-Use" on the City & County of Honolulu Primary Urban Center Development Plan.

The property is in the desirable Keeaumoku Street corridor which stretches inland approximately one mile from the rear (mauka) of Ala Moana Center and is well-established for its many ethnic restaurants and shopping opportunities. The greater Kapiolani Boulevard/Ala Moana neighborhood has been booming in recent years as a primary focus of development and master planning, a trend anticipated to continue on an increasing basis over the near to mid-term.

Our study and presentation is comprised of two elements.

1. Economic Impact Analysis. To estimate the general and specific effects on the local economy which will result from the development of Keeaumoku Development Project, including initial construction and on-going business and maintenance employment, worker wages and household income, contractor/supplier profits, end-user expenditures and business activity, and other regional monetary and employment effects. We also utilized the State of Hawaii Inter-County Input-Output Model to test Type II impacts.

Mr. Nan Chul Shin Mr. Wyeth M. Matsubara March 5, 2019 Page 3

2. Public Cost/Benefit Assessment. To quantify the impact on the public purse arising from the subject project regarding new tax/fee revenues which will be received by the State of Hawaii and City & County of Honolulu due to the project's actualization, versus the implied costs of providing needed additional governmental services to the population of the development.

Our analysis assumes no Transient Vacation Rentals will be permitted at Keeaumoku Development Project.

The pertinent results from our studies are presented in the following report, which opens with an Introduction and Executive Summary describing our salient conclusions. The remainder of the report is comprised of a series of brief discussions and introduction of addenda exhibits containing the tabular presentation of our data, analysis, and modeling for each aspect of the assignment.

The purpose of study was to provide economic and fiscal modeling, and an analysis of probable impacts on the Honolulu/Oahu community resulting from the build-out of the proposed condominium project for inclusion in submittals in its on-going entitlement process. As part of our investigation and analysis we have:

inspected the subject property and its environs;

interviewed knowledgeable parties active in the regional economy and property development;

reviewed federal, state and county materials, statistics, policies and publications;

accessed on-line databases; and,

compiled materials from published and private sources, and our files.

There were no extraordinary assumptions

All conclusions presented herein are subject to the identified limiting conditions, assumptions, and certification of CBRE, Inc./Hallstrom Team, in addition to any others specifically set forth in the text.

We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to NAN INC. regarding this proposed, sustainable mixed-use community.

Respectfully submitted, CBRE - VALUATION & ADVISORY SERVICES Tom Holliday, CRE, FRICS Director Phone: (808) 541-5120 Fax: (808) 541-5155 Email: [email protected]

Subject Location Maps

i


IIsland of Oahu Map Showing Location of Keeaumoku Development Project

Aerial of Keeaumoku Development Project Property and State Tax Map, Highlighted in

Yellow


ii

View of Keeaumoku Development Project property looking diamond head/mauka from

intersection of Keeaumoku Street and Rycroft Street.

Central property frontage on diamond head side of Keeaumoku Street.

View of property looking diamond head/makai from intersection of Keeaumoku Street and Liona Street.

Table of Contents

iii

Table of Contents

Subject Location Maps ........................................................................................................ i

Table of Contents .............................................................................................................. iii

Introduction and Primary Study Conclusions ....................................................................... 1

The Subject Property and Proposed Project ......................................................................... 8

Economic Impacts of the Proposed Development .............................................................. 12

Public Fiscal (Costs/Benefits) from the Proposed Development ........................................... 25

ADDENDA

Addendum A - Economic Impact Analysis Tables

Addendum B- Public Fiscal Assessment Tables

Addendum C - Qualifications

Introduction and Primary Study Conclusions

1

Introduction and Primary Study Conclusions INTRODUCTION

The CBRE, Inc./Hallstrom Team assignment was to analyze the proposed Keeaumoku Development Project community from a real estate market perspective and to identify and quantify probable economic and public fiscal impacts associated with the master plan(s) considering competitive, regional, prevailing and forecast trends to answer two basic study questions:

1. What will be the general/specific and direct/indirect economic impacts on Oahu resulting from the undertaking of the Keeaumoku Development Project via employment, wages, business operations, population, property values and other economic activity related to the real property asset?

2. What will be the net, new effect on the state and county "public purse" from the project regarding costs of services required to service the Keeaumoku Development Project population versus increased tax/fee receipts?

These issues were addressed through a comprehensive research and inquiry process utilizing data from market investigation, governmental agencies, various Hawaii-based media, industry spokespersons/sources, on-line databases, published public and private documents, and our files.

The pertinent results of our study are highlighted in the following summary report which contains brief narrative, tabular data and other materials contributing to our conclusions. The presentation is divided into four sections:

11. Primary Study Conclusions

2. The Subject Property and Proposed Project

3. Analysis of the Economic Impacts from the development of Keeaumoku Development Project

4. Assessment of the Net, New Public Fiscal Impacts (Costs/Benefits) Associated with the Keeaumoku Development Project

The primary source information regarding the subject used in our study were:

Maps, master plans, unit counts, density estimates and background materials provided by NAN Inc., Design Partners, Inc., and other members of the planning team;

Direct cost estimates, including on and off-site work and vertical construction, estimated at $700 million by the developer (about $665 per square foot of gross area). Indirect and other costs estimated based on similar expenses and ratios on other Ala Moana/Kakaako projects built since 2014.

Resident population and housing projections, proposed development and other maps, community plan materials, and other data from the County of Honolulu Planning Department and State of Hawaii Office of Planning, DBEDT, and Dept. of Labor and Industrial Relations;

The United States 2010 Census and subsequent updates;

Data from the Honolulu Board of Realtors, Hawaii Information Service, CBRE intranet sources; and, the Hawaii Community Development Authority


2

Data from other published and on-line sources and from our files.

The developer supplied the absorption estimates for the finished inventory upon which our econometric modeling was based. We did not complete a Market Study as part of this analysis. They forecast total absorption of the residential units and commercial bays within two to three-years of commencing pre-sale

The Keeaumoku Development Project site and environs have been viewed by our firm on many occasions and we have completed numerous appraisal and consulting assignments within the Keeaumoku Corridor over the past four decades.

The modeling time-frame for our Economic Impact Analysis and Public Fiscal Assessment studies are over the same period which serves as a basis for all analysis and extends just under six-years, from late-2018 through year-end 2024, broken-down as follows:

Planning/design, entitlements and approvals will be completed from late-2018 through 2020.

Construction, comprised of site work to project completion will require about three-years from early 2021 through the end of 2023.

Sale/absorption of product would commence with pre-sales/leasing in mid-2020 and be fully completed by year-end 2024; however, it is anticipated the units will substantially be sold/reserved over some two to three years of offering.

Reaching stabilized community "operations" in 2024 (and beyond).

This time-frame effectively depicts the life-span of the project from today, through final entitlement, ground-breaking, absorption/build-out, and its eventual functional "stabilization".

Primary and direct secondary capital/economic outcomes from the development of Keeaumoku Development Project are quantified and presented on all tables in periodic segments (from 2018-2020, 2021-2023 and 2024). The de facto population in the community is identified, and the resultant new taxes and costs to the County and State are estimated.

We have also tested our econometric model outcomes against the formulae within the State DBEDT "2012 Hawaii Inter-Island Input-Output Model" (approved August 2016).

It is noted, our economic and fiscal models are not specifically time-sensitive as all dollar amounts are expressed in constant 2018 dollars. Should the project timeline move several years in either direction from the modeling period we would not anticipate major changes to our stated conclusions.

PRIMARY STUDY CONCLUSIONS

Based on our analysis of the subject property, its environs, and envisioned development we have reached the following conclusions as of the Third Quarter of 2018 regarding the probable market standing and combined economic impacts of the proposed Keeaumoku Development Project.

Economic Overview

The State of Hawaii has steadily rebounded from the 2008-09 recession and associated down-cycle in the real estate market and is now within an extended-term favorable economic


3

period featuring gradually and consistently strengthening property sectors. Sales activity, volume, and prices have all shown meaningful recovery throughout virtually all sectors of Oahu; in most cases showing near to full recovery to the levels achieved during the 2004-07 peak market years. Expectations are for continuing economic expansion within the current up-cycle during 2018-19 (and into the mid-term) resulting in increasing demand for real estate inventory and continuing barriers to increased new development.

Among the favorable economic indicators and trends on Oahu the unemployment rate has dropped to a current level of about 2.4 percent (approaching effective full employment) from a high of 6.0 percent during the depths of the recession; median household income has grown some 23.6 percent since 2009; there has been positive absorption of retail and industrial space in 2018 with an increasing velocity of commercial/industrial space development; and, tourism is continually achieving all-time records year-after-year with total visitor days and spending growing at compounded annual rates of 2.5 percent and 2.9 percent respectively since 2008.

The Oahu residential real estate re-sale market has also shown post-recession recovery and growth. Island-wide the single family residential, condominium and vacant lot sectors in 2015-2017 and deep into 2018 are experiencing the highest level of sales activity since 2004-06 (totaling 9,732 transactions combined in 2017), and median prices are at their highest ever for both single family homes and condominium units. General indicators point to up-cycle conditions with increasing demand, sales velocity, and prices in the context of limited supply additions.

The University of Hawaii Economic Research Organization (UHERO) Forecast Project County Forecast (June 2018) forecasts strong growth again for Honolulu County in 2018 followed by slowing but continuing annual percentile growth over the subsequent two years for all six projected factors.

The UHERO Honolulu County forecasts are shown below.

Though not issued on a County-basis, the State of Hawaii Department of Business, Economic Development & Tourism (DBEDT) Quarterly Outlook for the Economy (2nd Quarter 2018) statewide forecasts show continuing gains in all 13 categories from 2019 through 2021, with just one ("Civilian Employment") off nominally in 2018.

The projections are more optimistic than their prior quarter forecasts, and have been gaining upward momentum for the past several years. The 2016-17 (historic) and 2018-2021 (projected DBEDT statewide forecasts are shown in the following excerpted table.


4

Overall, the Oahu/Honolulu economy continues in its extended post-recession recovery and upcycle, regaining virtually all "lost" ground and at or approaching peak indicator levels. Apart from external influences, the upward trending appears sustainable and able to achieve annual expansion at greater than three percent compounded for most sectors. The overall near to mid-term outlook is favorable.

Economic Impact Analysis

We have constructed a model depicting the economic impact of the Keeaumoku Development Project on the Honolulu and Statewide community during its "lifespan" from anticipated ground-breaking in 2021, through build-out, full absorption, and stabilized "operations" (commercial, common element management and maintenance) in 2024 and thereafter.

The model builds on the absorption estimates and data contained in our market study. All estimated amounts are in constant 2018 dollars. We note, even if the timing of development or absorption moves from our projected dates it does not change the resultant outcomes or indicators. The use of constant dollars removes time as a determinant variable.


5

The purpose of the model is to illustrate how capital, jobs, wages, population and business activity will flow over time for planning and budgeting purposes apart from and present value considerations.

Among the primary forecasts and conclusions regarding the economic impacts of the development of Keeaumoku Development Project are as follows:

The development of Keeaumoku Development Project will bring in an estimated $714.6 million of new, direct capital investment (along with significant unquantified indirect expenditures) into the central Honolulu economy and real estate market. This will generate some $918.6 million in total new economic activity island-wide during its construction and absorption period (from circa 2021 to 2024), and it will contribute some $203.9 million in annual economic activity on a stabilized basis thereafter.

The construction of the Keeaumoku Development Project infrastructure, residential, commercial and central system components will directly create an estimated 2,400 "worker-years" of employment (the equivalent of 52 work weeks at 40 hours per week) in the trades and supply businesses during build-out, averaging about 600 worker years annually, with an estimated $183.1 million in wages (averaging about $45.8 million per year).

The operating businesses in the commercial components will create some 259-new worker-years of Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) employment on a stabilized basis with cumulative annual wages totaling $12.7 million.

The condominium common element managers, and the upkeep, maintenance, and renovations of the 964 housing units will create 62 combined worker-years of employment with associated wages of $2.8 million per year.

Associated secondary/off-site employment during the overall development and absorption time-frame will total 907 worker-years with wages of $50.5 million and a stabilized FTE job-count of 107 with total wages of $5.9 million per year.

At build-out and full-occupancy the average daily de facto population of the community will be some 2,219 persons, comprised of 2,085 full-time residents and an average of 134 non-resident second/vacation home users. The cumulative resident annual household income at stabilization is projected at $219 million. Discretionary expenditures into the Oahu economy/businesses community by the Keeaumoku Development Project population will average $127 million per year on a stabilized basis.

The on-going business activity (excluding construction) in the community will average $76.9 million per year on a stabilized basis. The base impact to the Honolulu County economy from on-site activity and off-sire spending by residents will average $203.9 million annually.

Application of the State Input-Output Model macro multipliers depicting direct, indirect and induced economic impacts arising from development of Keeaumoku Development Project results in significantly higher economic out-flow indicators than those from our direct, subject-specific micro model.

The total State economic impact from construction of the project would reach $1.4 billion, there would be 7,789 total worker-years of jobs created, and the total increase in earnings statewide would be $428.8 million.

The State model also estimates the total annual economic output from on-going business activity within Keeaumoku Development Project would be at $390.8 million annually on a


6

stabilized basis. The total number of worker-years islandwide attributable to the subject dollars flowing through the economy would be 3,494 positions upon stabilization.

Public Fiscal Benefits

Public fiscal (or cost/benefit) impacts were estimated on a per capita basis for the part-time, second/vacation unit buyers and guests at Keeaumoku Development Project, estimated to average about 134 persons daily. This is based on a conservative assumption that each new person added to the Oahu community is "responsible for" a similar tax cost/obligation as every other person on the island.

We note the actual additional costs and impact on services from these part-time residents will be minimal as they will place limited demands on schools, administrative infrastructure, most governmental services or facilities, and are unlikely to push emergency services beyond an expansion-requiring threshold.

The estimated amounts represent "new" tax dollars and governmental expenditures resulting from the Keeaumoku Development Project development.

The 2,085 full-time residents within the project are assumed to be relocating from elsewhere on the island or the result of natural growth in the community so their government fiscal costs are already in-place or anticipated and factored into existing and projected County and State budgets. Likewise, we have not included their taxable household income or spending in the taxation model as that is already assumed to be flowing through the Honolulu County economy and government coffers and is being appropriately taxed.

However, their new units at Keeaumoku Development Project and the community/homeowner's association operations and maintenance/renovations will add to the real property tax base of the County along with associated wages and construction costs that are subject to State Gross Excise and Income taxes as they are resulting from new construction while their existing homes will continue to require servicing even after they depart.

The City & County of Honolulu will realize Real Property Taxes and other secondary receipts and development fees totaling $37.4 million during the 6-year building and absorption projection period (2018-2024), and $11.1 million annually on a stabilized basis thereafter.

The State of Hawaii will receive Gross Excise and Income taxes, secondary revenues, and school impact fees of $61.9 million during the 2018-2024 modeling period, and $6.4 million per year thereafter.

After accounting for the per capita costs of servicing the new non-resident/second home owner population of the project, the County will gain a net benefit ("profit") of $37 million during the development period and $10. million annually on a stabilized basis. The State will have net benefits of $60.5 million to 2060 and $5.1 million stabilized per year.

The major economic impacts and public fiscal conclusions (for the identified population) are summarized on the following table. The column on the left summarizes the cumulative impacts during the initial six-year build-out period (2018-2024) covering infrastructure emplacement, absorption of all product types, and ramp-up to stabilization of economic activity; and the righthand column the annual impacts after stabilization.


7

CCumulative DDuring Build-Out Stabilized Annually

MModel Item Period Thereafter

Direct Capital Investment $714,619,500

Local Contractor's Profits $71,461,950

Local Supplier's Profits $28,584,780

Worker Years of Jobs 3,628 748

Employee Wages $249,035,017 $21,446,685

Total De Facto Population 2,219

Non-Resident Average Daily Population 134

Full-Time Resident Household Income $218,911,392 $218,911,392

De Facto Population Expenditures (On & Off Site) $126,988,388 $126,988,388

Total Operating/Business Activity Gross Receipts $76,915,770 $76,915,770

Total Oahu "Base" Economic Impact $918,523,658 $203,904,158

CCounty of Honolulu Gross Tax Receipts $37,404,569 $11,051,322

SState of Hawaii Gross Tax Receipts $61,878,505 $6,442,597

CCounty of Honolulu Costs of Services (per capita basis) $421,358 $421,358

SState Costs of Services (per capita basis) $1,331,480 $1,331,480

CCounty of Honolulu Net Benefits or (Loss) $36,983,211 $10,629,964

SState Net Benefits or (Loss) $60,547,025 $5,111,117

Source: CBRE/Hallstrom Team

IINCLUDES ONLY THOSE TAXES AND COSTS WHICH ARE "NEW" TO OAHU AS RESULT OF THE PROJECT

SUMMARY COMPARISON OF MAJOR ECONOMIC IMPACTSAND PUBLIC FISCAL COSTS/BENEFITS

Keeaumoku Development ProjectAll Amounts Expressed in Constant, Uninflated 2018 Dollars

Subject Property and Proposed Project

8

The Subject Property and Proposed Project The Keeaumoku Development Project mixed-use condominium master plan is described at length in reports published by other members of the development team, and summarized in the following chart.

In this configuration, it is comprised of two 400-foot semi-attached towers having 42 stories of affordable and market-priced residential units atop a multi-story podium containing commercial, parking and amenity uses.


9

The sectional drawing is shown below, as viewed from Keeaumoku Street.

The unit mixes for all 964 units and for the 128 affordable-priced units are as follows.

The following four plates show the Keeaumoku Development Project condominium Scheme 2 from the Ground Level through representative upper-tower floors.


10


11

Economic Impacts of the Proposed Development

12

Economic Impacts of the Proposed Development The development of Keeaumoku Development Project will result in significant expenditures that will favorably impact the Oahu economy on both a direct and indirect basis, increasing the level of capital investment and capital flow in the region, which will in turn create employment and widen the tax base.

From a direct perspective, the proposed 964 multi-family units and 88,000 square foot of commercial space will create numerous construction, equipment operator and specialty trade jobs on- and off-site, directly and indirectly, during the planning and emplacement of the infrastructure, and building of the improvements.

After completion of the common element/systems, vertical construction, support facilities and amenities over a multi-year development period, there will be permanent employment positions created by the restaurants, retail and service/office tenant businesses; common element and homeowner association operations; and, by the improvements themselves (landscape, service, maintenance, and renovation needs during their economic life).

Numerous local businesses will see significant profit opportunities arising for contracting companies constructing the improvements and for local businesses which would supply a substantial portion of the materials needed in the building efforts.

The general island economy also will benefit from the subject development, as its residents, non-resident owners/users, employees and businesses will spend large amounts of discretionary income in off-site shops, restaurants, and service establishments throughout Honolulu County, and in purchasing goods and services. Non-residents owners, users and their guests will be generally upper-income and have daily expenditures comparable with the average Oahu/Waikiki visitor.

Indirectly, as these wages, profits, and expenditures move through the regional economy, they will have a ripple, or "multiplier," effect which increases the amount of capital flowing to the entire island from the development of the subject.

Construction, operational and other workers earning wages via Keeaumoku Development Project development and associated off-site/supporting efforts will spend most of their income on living and entertainment expenses while supporting and patronizing other island businesses. Much of this spending would be re-directed by these businesses to other island industries, and significant portions of these secondary profits would in turn be put back through the region's economic and tax structure.

These substantial direct and indirect economic impacts associated with the proposed subject project, as quantified in the following sections, are all the result of the capital investment and entrepreneurship necessary to convert undeveloped, fair/poor quality agricultural lands into Oahu economy will be meaningfully stimulated by the capital investments, population/user spending and business operations of the development.

Our economic modeling is based on a six-year planning/approval, build-out and full-absorption period from late-2018 to late-2024, with ground-breaking and pre-sales in 2021 and concluding with total build-out and product absorption in 2024.

However, whether full development takes 4 years or 10 years, the stabilized "operation" of the condominium and its de facto population will be the same following completion. Using constant


13

uninflated 2018 dollars throughout the model eliminates time as a significant variable in the analysis. The stabilized projections are identical regardless of the full build-out timeframe.

It is anticipated that final approvals, surveys and planning will require approximately 26 months (through 2020), the initial phase of infrastructure, vertical construction and pre-sales/leasing will begin in 2021 (focusing on the workforce/affordable inventory), with full-occupancy and stabilized use reached in 2024.

CAPITAL INVESTMENT AND CONSTRUCTION COSTS

The subject will bring an estimated $714.7 million in direct development capital into Honolulu over the build-out period for the project as summarized on the following table.

This format and "development periods" are identical for all the summary tables comprising our economic impact model.

Pre-Development Construction Absorption & Occupancy

Project Year 2018-2020 2021-2023 2024Totals During Build-

Out

Site Work/Infrastructure Emplacement (1) $40,000,000 $$40,000,000

Tower and Commercial Construction - Direct/Hard Costs (2) $504,499,500 $$504,499,500

Project Expenses - Indirect/Soft Costs (3) $42,530,000 $127,590,000 $$170,120,000

TOTAL PERIODIC CONSTRUCTION COSTS $42,530,000 $672,089,500 $0 $714,619,500

Contractor Profits (4) $4,253,000 $67,208,950 $0 $$71,461,950

Supplier Profits (5) $1,701,200 $26,883,580 $0 $$28,584,780

(1) Includes all pre-construction site work, on and off-site infrastructure and finish work (hardscape and accessways & open space).

(3) Estimated at 32.5 percent of site work and direct construction costs; or 24.5 percent of total "all in" costs.

(4) Estimated at 10 percent of all-in costs.



(2) Estimated at $475 per square foot for 939,800 square feet of gross residential floor area and $525 per square foot for 82,815 square feet of gross commercial floor area. Includes all amenities, common areas and parking.

Total cost estimates provided by Developer, allocated by CBRE/Hallstrom Team based on similar urban projects.

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE AND ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR THE KEEAUMOKU DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

All Amounts Expressed in Constant 2018 Dollars

DIRECT BUSINESS PROFITS FROM CONSTRUCTION

While a significant percentage of the materials needed to build the subject infrastructure, residential towers, and commercial/parking components must be imported to Oahu, a portion of


14

the construction costs spent in the development will directly flow to local businesses in the form of contractor profits and supplier profits.

Typically, within the industry net contractor profit margins are expected to be at 8 to 20 percent of total construction costs. We have used a conservative ten percent figure. Supplier profits were extrapolated at four percent of total costs. The estimates were shown along the bottom of Table 17.

The total Contractor's Profit generated by Keeaumoku Development Project for local building companies totals a cumulative profit of $71.5 million over the construction period. The total annual Supplier's Profit equates to $28.6 million in aggregate.

EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES CREATED

Based on indicators provided by the recent construction of comparable scale/quality projects in the Ala Moana, Kakaako and Waikiki neighborhoods and Hawaii industry averages, we have estimated the demand for on- and off-site, direct and indirect, full-time equivalent employment positions associated with:

1. Laying of infrastructure systems and all site work.

2. Construction of the commercial podiums and parking garage.

3. Construction of the two residential towers containing the multifamily units (market and affordable-priced).

4. The on-going retail, restaurant, service and other businesses located in the project.

5. The administration, maintenance and security of the central common element and the condominium homeowners' association.

6. Providing continuing maintenance, repair and renovation services to the occupied improvements.

7. Off-site and secondary businesses serving the workers and residents in Keeaumoku Development Project.

The construction, maintenance, and indirect/off-site employment opportunities created by the subject development (items 1, 2, 3, 6 & 7) will not all be "new" jobs requiring new Oahu residents and workers, but will be vitally needed new opportunities for in-place resident construction trade workers and existing local businesses. The jobs associated with the commercial, and owner associations operations will represent an expansion of the employment pool; although, some tenants in the commercial centers may be relocating from elsewhere and not generate "new" positions.

It is assumed the off-site/indirect work created will be steered towards existing Honolulu supply, equipment providers, and other service companies, which will help mitigate the impacts of economic cycles on their business activities.

In this regard, the combination of employment types generated by the subject development will beneficially serve to support existing businesses while also providing a substantial number of new employment opportunities; contributing to the sustainable health of the Honolulu economic community for the next generation of residents.


15

Our employment estimates on are based on Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) "worker-years," although one worker-year (or circa 2,080 working hours annually) may be comprised of many employees involved in specialized tasks of a much shorter duration.

Our projections are founded on examples provided by various major mixed-use and residential tower developments undertaken in central Honolulu over the past decade, and via formulae expressing relationships between total worker wages/benefits and construction task costs.

The following table summarizes our Keeaumoku Development Project employment projections for each development and operating component, on and off-site, on a periodic basis through 2024 and stabilized thereafter.

PPre-Development Construction Absorption & Occupancy


Out

Site Work/Infrastructure Emplacement (1) 100 100

Tower and Commercial Construction (2) 1,682 1,682

Project Architectural & Engineering, Entitlement, Professional Fees and Administration (3)

155 464 619

Total Periodic Construction Jobs 155 2,246 0 2,400

On-Going Business Employment Stabilized

Annually

Commercial Worker Years (4) 259 259 259

Maintenance & Common Element (5) 62 62 62

Total Periodic On-Going Business Jobs 320 320 320

Off-Site Employment (6) 52 749 107 907 107

TOTAL PERIODIC WORKER YEARS 206 2,994 427 3,628 748

(1) Infrastructure construction employment estimated at 1 worker-year for every $400,000 in costs.

(2) Vertical construction employment estimated at 1 worker-year for every $300,000 in costs.

(3) Project planning and administration employment estimated at 1 worker-year for every $275,000 in costs.

(4) Commercial employment estimated at 1 full-time-equivalent worker for every 350 square feet of gross floor area. First stores opening 2024

(6) Estimated at one cumulative off-site employment position for every three on site positions.


(5) Includes Association of Apartment Owners and commercial common element administration, security and maintenance staff of 14 jobs. One in-unit maintenance/renovation worker for every 20 units.

ESTIMATED YEARLY FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT EMPLOYMENT POSITIONS CREATED BY THE KEEAUMOKU DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

A total of 2,400 worker-years of employment in the construction trades, materials supply and related businesses will be needed for developing Keeaumoku Development Project.


16

Employees in the commercial bay tenants will total some 259 FTE positions on a stabilized basis; an average of one worker per 350 square feet of floor space, with the first stores opening in 2024.

Common element, association, maintenance and renovation worker-years will total 62 FTE positions on a stabilized basis. The count includes a common element/association staff of 14 FTEs, and one FTE maintenance/repair/renovation worker for every 20 housing units.

Off-Site/Indirect/Secondary employment created by Keeaumoku Development Project will total 3.628 worker-years from 2018 through 2024 and 107 FTE positions per year as stabilized. This is the equivalent of one off-site/secondary FTE position for every three on-site workers.

WAGE INCOME GENERATED

In accordance with data compiled by the state Department of Labor and Industry Relations, as tempered through our analysis, we have estimated the personal income (in the form of wages) which will flow to Oahu workers from Keeaumoku Development Project construction, operations and use. The results are shown on the table below.


17



Out


Tower and Commercial Construction (1) $119,169,509 $$119,169,509

Project Architectural & Engineering, Entitlement, Professional Fees and Administration (2) $14,201,613 $42,604,838 $$56,806,450

Total Periodic Construction/Development Wages $14,201,613 $168,860,746 $0 $183,062,359

Stabilized

On-Going Business Wages Annually

Commercial (3) $12,716,935 $12,716,935 $$12,716,935

Maintenance & Common Element (4) $2,785,968 $2,785,968 $$2,785,968

Total Periodic On-Going Business Wages $15,502,903 $15,502,903 $15,502,903

Off-Site Employment Wages (5) $2,868,888 $41,657,085 $5,943,781 $50,469,754 $$5,943,781

TOTAL PERIODIC WAGES $17,070,501 $210,517,831 $21,446,685 $249,035,017 $21,446,685

All wages based on 2017 "Occupational Employment Statistics (OES) survey, escalated to 2018 at 3%

(1) Mean annual wage for "Construction and Extraction Occupations" (SOC Code 45-000) at $68,800/year for 2017, escalated to 2018.

(5) Mean annual wage for "All Occupations" (SOC Code 00-000) at $54,030/year for 2017, escalated to 2018.

Wages taken from State of Hawaii "Hawaii Workforce Infonet" "Publications and Tables> Production Worker H&E Data Hours and Earnings" for 2016.


(3) Weighted mean annual wage for "Sales and Related Occupations" (SOC Code 41-000) at $36,390 for 2017 and "Business and Financial Occupations", escalated to 2018. Indicated mean wage of $49,192.

(4) Weighted mean annual wage for "Building & Ground Maintenance" (SOC Code 37-000) at $34,090 for 2017, "Office & Administrative Occupations" (SOC Code 43-000) at $40,020 for 2017, and "Installation, Maintenance & Repair Ocupations" (SOC Code 49-000) for 2017. Escalated to 2018 with indicated meand wage of $45,008.

ESTIMATED YEARLY EMPLOYEE WAGES CREATED BY THE KEEAUMOKU DEVELOPMENT PROJECT


(2) Weighted mean annual wage for "Business and Financial Operations Occupations" (SOC Code 13-000) at $69.830/year in 2017, "Architectural & Engineering" (17-000) at $82,900, and "Management Occupations" (11-000) at $107,750, escalated to 2018. Indicated mean wage of $91,828.

The gross average full-time equivalent wage estimates for a worker-year according to the identified employment categories for 2018 are as follows:

Construction workers (covering all trades), $70,864 per year.

Commercial positions (retail, restaurant, service and business), $49,192 annually.

Common and condominium administration, maintenance and security employees, $45,008 per year.

Off-site and indirect workers of all types, $55,651 annually.

Overall average wages paid via the subject development are equal to $68,650 per worker-year created during the six-year modeling timeframe.

Total construction wages paid during build-out will be $183.1 million.


18

Total commercial employee wages, stabilized annually, will total $12.7 million.

Total common element/association and maintenance/renovation employee wages will stabilize at $2.8 million per year.

Off-sits/indirect employee wages will total $50.5 million during build-out and be $5.9 million annually on a stabilized basis.

During the development and absorption period, on- and off-site, direct and indirect worker wages would total $249.0 million.

POPULATION, INCOME AND EXPENDITURES

The units of Keeaumoku Development Project will be a collection of full-time residents and non-resident second/vacation home buyer.

Every major condominium project in the Ala Moana/Kakaako/Waikiki corridor containing market-priced inventory has attracted significant numbers of non-resident purchasers, with price, quality and location being the primary factors in the amount of non-resident buyers. Projects closing since mid-decade range from less than 10 percent to more than 80 percent of the units being bought by non-residents.

Given the interior location of the project, several blocks inland from Ala Moana Center and Ala Moana Beach Park, with minimal ocean influence, we project the percentage of non-resident purchasers at Keeaumoku Development Project will be around 20 percent of the total at the middle to low-end of the market range.

These resident households and non-resident owners and guests will constitute the de facto population of the community members, whose income and discretionary expenditures will create major positive impacts in the Honolulu County economy.

We have quantified these focal statistics within the modeling process. The results are shown on the following table.


19

AAbsorption/Occupancy

2024/Stabilized

Total Number of Residential Units 964 Market-Priced Units (87% of Total) 836 Workforce/Affordable Priced (13% of Total) 128

Market-Priced Multifamily Units

Total Number of Units 836

Resident Units 669

Percent of Total Townhouses 80%

Non-Resident Units 167

Percent of Total Townhouses 20%

Resident Population (1) 1,778

Non-Resident Population (2) 134

Workforce/Affordable-Priced Multifamily Units

Total Number of Units 128

Resident Units 128

Percent of Total Units 100%

Non-Resident Units 0

Percent of Total Units 0%

Resident Population (3) 307

Non-Resident Population 0

Total Resident Population 2,085

Total Non-Resident Population 134

TOTAL DE FACTO POPULATION 2,219

RESIDENT HOUSEHOLD INCOME (4)

Annually $218,911,392

NON-RESIDENT SPENDING (5)

Annually $6,587,122

TOTAL DISCRETIONARY EXPENDITURES (6)

Annually $126,988,388

(1) Resident market-priced multifamily households estimated to have average size of 2.6 persons, with average occupancy of 100%.

(3) Affordable-priced multifamily households estimated to have average size of 2.4 persons, with average occupancy of 100%.

Source: CBRE/Hallstrom Team.

ESTIMATED DE FACTO POPULATION, RESIDENT HOUSEHOLD INCOME AND DISCRETIONARY EXPENDITURES FOR THE KEEAUMOKU DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

(2) Non- resident market-priced multifamily parties estimated to have average size of 2.4 persons (resident size plus some 10%), with average occupancy of 30%.

(4) The median household income for a three-person household on Oahu is estimated at $105,000 for 2018.

(6) Includes 55% of resident household income and 100 percent of non-resident spending.

(5) Estimated at $135 per day (typical visitor daily spending excluding lodging of $110 and $25 per day alowance for household furnishings), all of which is discretionary.



20

The top half of the table depicts the construction/absorption of the 964 residential units and their expected division between resident and non-resident ownership and market priced and affordable units. We project:

87 percent of the total number of multifamily units at Keeaumoku Development Project (836 units), will be market-priced, with 80 percent being purchased by Oahu residents and 20 percent by non-residents.

The average household size for full-time resident household will be 2.66 persons and for non-resident owners 2.66 persons with an occupancy rate of 30 percent.

100 percent of the 128 workforce/affordable-priced multifamily units will be purchased by Oahu families with an average household size of 2.40 persons.

The total resident population at build-out will be 2,085 persons, the total non-resident population will be 134 persons (daily average), resulting in a total de facto population by year-end 2024 of 2,219 persons.

Based on affordable-pricing guidelines coupled with the level of income necessary to support the purchase of the market-priced inventory, we estimate the average annual income for resident households at Keeaumoku Development Project will be $105,000 in 2018 dollars. This is the current median household income for Oahu households with three persons.

On a stabilized basis after full-absorption and occupancy the total resident household income will be $218.9 million annually.

The de facto population of the project will place significant discretionary expenditure dollars into the Oahu economy. This will be comprised of the year-round, daily expenditures by the full-time resident group, and the purchases made by non-resident owners and guests during use of their units. Considering the cost of the market-priced finished homes and units, the non-resident segment will be in the upper-income brackets with substantial available income for such spending.

We estimate that full-time resident households will spend about 55 percent of their total income on discretionary items, with the remainder going towards mortgage debt service and fixed expenses. The daily per capita spending by non-resident owners and their guests in the Honolulu economy is estimated will be on average $135; or about what the typical Oahu visitor spends daily. This pays for all food, entertainment, household goods, locally purchased fixtures and furnishings, utilities, clothing, and other daily items.

The total de facto population discretionary expenditures made by subject project owners in the local market will be at $127 million annually on a stabilized basis, in 2018 dollars.

While meaningful portions of these discretionary income will be spent in the on-site "neighborhood" businesses much will flow into other Honolulu and island-wide companies.

OPERATING ECONOMIC ACTIVITY

The estimated level of total gross on-site economic activity created by the proposed Keeaumoku Development Project community on a stabilized basis, from spending by both the condominium population and non-resident patronage, is summarized on the following table.


21

The total amount of on-site economic activity resulting from the development of the project at stabilization will total some $76.9 million annually.

The amount includes spending at the retail, restaurant, service and other businesses, and on community administration and maintenance/renovation of the structures and units.


2018-2020 2021-2023 2024 Stabilized Annually

Commercial Businesses (1)

Annual Sales Activity $67,871,650 $$67,871,650

Maintenance & Common Element (2)

Annual Activity $9,044,120 $$9,044,120

Total Economic Activity

ANNUAL ACTIVITY AT END-OF-PERIOD $76,915,770 $76,915,770

(1) Estimated based on average annual sales of $1,100 per square foot for ground floor and $550 per square foot for second floor.

(2) Estimated as shown below.

Site/Ext. Renos. Number of Units Total Expenses

Market Multifamily (1) $4,800 $5,000 853 $8,359,400

Affordable Multifamily (2) $3,840 $2,500 108 $684,720

(1) Assuming 80% of condominium Monthly Maintenance fee of $500 is used for site/exterior.



PROJECTED ON-SITE OPERATING ECONOMIC ACTIVITY AT KEEAUMOKU DEVELOPMENT PROJECT


Average Site/Exterior Maintenance and Renovations Cost per Year

SUMMARY OF DIRECT, LOCAL ECONOMIC IMPACTS

As correlated on the table below, the Total Base Economic Impact of Keeaumoku Development Project, including all capital investment and on-site economic activity, from 2018 through 2024 will be $918.5 million.

On a stabilized basis after build-out it will total $203.9 million per year.


22


2018-2020 2021-2023 2024 Totals During Build-Out Stabilized Annually

Construction Activity

Construction Wages $14,201,613 $168,860,746 $$183,062,359

Contractor Profits $4,253,000 $67,208,950 $$71,461,950

Supplier Profits $1,701,200 $26,883,580 $$28,584,780

Other Construction Costs $22,374,187 $409,136,224 $$431,510,411

Total Construction Impact $42,530,000 $672,089,500 $714,619,500

De Facto Population Spending

A Annually $126,988,388 $$126,988,388 $126,988,388

On-Site Economic Activity

Annual Commercial Business Activity (1) $67,871,650 $$67,871,650 $67,871,650

Annual Maintenance & Common Element $9,044,120 $$9,044,120 $9,044,120

TOTAL BASE ECONOMIC IMPACT

Annually $42,530,000 $672,089,500 $203,904,158 $918,523,658 $203,904,158

(1) Assumes 10% of business activity generated by Keaaumoku Village residents spending, previously accounted for, and adjusted accoundingly.


SUMMARY OF ECONOMIC IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH DEVELIOPMENT OF THE KEEAUMOKU DEVELOPMENT PROJECT


Not all the spending will be "new" to the Oahu/Honolulu. Most of the full-time resident spending will merely be relocated from one area or store in another neighborhood to the Keeaumoku Development Project area; however, a significant amount will also be new spending by "natural growth" resident households.

STATE INPUT/OUTPUT MODEL

We have also analyzed the impacts of the project for Oahu and Statewide using the Hawaii County Input-Output Economic Model (2012 data approved by DBEDT in 2016) Type II multipliers. These factors quantify the total Direct, Indirect and Induced "effects" of various forms of business and spending activity as it flows through the economy of the islands.

In every instance, application of the macro Input-Output multipliers resulted in higher dollar, employment, and tax revenue indicators than in our subject-focused micro model which was designed to reflect Direct and upper-level Indirect impacts only.

Among the outputs using the State method:

The $714.6 million in cumulative Keeaumoku Development Project construction costs will generate a total State Economic Output of $1.4 billion during build-out with subsequent


23

commercial, association and maintenance/ renovation activity averaging $390.8 million annually on a stabilized basis.

Direct subject construction wage earnings of $183.1 million will yield $318.5 million in statewide wage earnings during build-out and on-going business activity will generate $35.2 million in wages each stabilized year.

Indirect and induced State taxes during build-out will total $89.1 million during construction and $25.9 million annually thereafter.

Direct effect jobs created by construction employment will be 2.25 times the number of on-site workers, or a total of 5,400 worker years of employment. The on-going business activity will generate 647 annually at stabilization.


Year 2018-2020 2021-2023 2024Totals During Build-

Out

Construction Costs $42,530,000 $672,089,500 $0 $714,621,524

1. Economic Output Multiplier 1.95 1.95 1.95 1.95 Total State Economic Output $82,933,500 $1,310,574,525 $0 $1,393,511,972

2. Earnings Multiplier 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 Total Increase in State Earnings $25,518,000 $403,253,700 $0 $428,772,914

3. State Tax Multipliers 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 Total Increase in State Taxes $5,303,491 $83,809,561 $0 $89,113,304

4. Total Job Multipliers 10.90 10.90 10.90 10.90 Total State Jobs Created 463.6 7,325.8 0.0 7,789.4

Construction Employment 155 2,246 0 2,400

5. Direct-Effect Job Multipliers 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 Total Direct Jobs Created 348.0 5,052.7 0.0 5,400.6

Construction Wages $14,201,613 $168,860,746 $0 $183,062,359

6. Direct-Effect Earnings 1.74 1.74 1.74 1.74 Total Increase in Direct Earnings $24,710,806 $293,817,699 $0 $318,528,505

Source: 2012 Hawaii Inter-County Input-Output Model (approved August 2016), and CBRE/Hallstrom Team

ESTIMATES OF TOTAL ECONOMIC IMPACT FROM SUBJECT CONSTRUCTION

All Amounts Expressed in Constant 2018 DollarsUSING STATE INPUT-OUTPUT MODEL "TYPE II" MULTIPLIERS FOR KEEAUMOKU DEVELOPMENT PROJECT


24



Out Stabilized Annually

Economic Activity $203,904,158 $203,904,158 $203,904,158

1. Economic Output Multiplier 1.92 1.92 1.92 Total State Economic Output $390,816,302 $390,816,302 $390,816,302

2. Earnings Multiplier 0.63 0.63 0.63 Total Increase in State Earnings $127,779,939 $127,779,939 $127,779,939

3. State Tax Multipliers 0.13 0.13 0.13 Total Increase in State Taxes $25,861,844 $25,861,844 $25,861,844

4. Total Job Multipliers 17.13 17.13 17.13 Total State Jobs Created 3,493.6 3,493.6 3,493.6

Operating Employment 427 427 427

5. Direct-Effect Job Multipliers 1.51 1.51 1.51 Total Direct Jobs Created 646.5 646.5 646.5

Operating Wages $21,446,685 $21,446,685 $21,446,685

6. Direct-Effect Earnings 1.64 1.64 1.64 Total Increase in Direct Earnings $35,244,052 $35,244,052 $35,244,052


ESTIMATES OF TOTAL ECONOMIC IMPACT FROM SUBJECT OPERATIONSUSING STATE INPUT-OUTPUT MODEL "TYPE II" MULTIPLIERS KEEAUMOKU DEVELOPMENT PROJECT


Public Fiscal Costs/Benefits from the Proposed Development

25

Public Fiscal (Costs/Benefits) from the Proposed Development The full-size tables depicting the modeling process summarized in this study section are presented in Addenda Exhibit C.

We have analyzed the public fiscal impacts considering only the non-resident component of Keeaumoku Development Project, both regarding tax benefits flowing to the State and County of Honolulu and the cost of providing government services to them on a per capita basis.

The exception is for the full-time resident real property taxes, as their new unit at Keeaumoku Development Project will mean increased real property assessments and taxes, with their previous homes still having a tax load that would be paid by a subsequent owner. The tax impacts of on-going maintenance/renovation costs of their new homes are also included in the model.

From a household income and discretionary spending perspective, the full-time resident population of Keeaumoku Development Project is assumed to live on Oahu prior to their residing at the subject project and is therefore already contributing their State GET and Income taxes, so these are excluded from the model. They are merely moving their home from one location to the other on the island and their public fiscal footprint will remain generally unchanged apart from the additions to the County's real property tax base.

Beyond these spending and taxes by existing residents already accounted for within the governmental tax base, Honolulu County and the State of Hawaii will receive millions of dollars in "new" tax receipts from the construction and stabilized operation of Keeaumoku Development Project from numerous revenue sources.

The purpose of this assessment is to delineate the direct areas in which the construction and long-term operation of Keeaumoku Development Project will potentially impact the public "purse". Specifically, the goal is to quantify and compare the costs of providing expanded County and State services to the project and its "new" population versus the economic benefits that accrue to governmental coffers via an increase in local and state tax and fee payments arising from the new economic activity associated with the development.

REAL PROPERTY TAXES (TO COUNTY OF HAWAII)

For the County, the primary tax source will be from Real Property Taxes paid by the owners of the Keeaumoku Development Project residential and commercial units.

The potential property tax receipts were estimated by applying current prevailing tax rates against the projected market value of the lots and homes as they are finished over time.

It was assumed the average assessed value for a finished affordable multifamily unit would be $539,000, 80 percent would be owner-occupied and entitled to the $80,000 exemption and 100 percent would be eligible for the resident tax rate.

Market-priced multifamily homes were estimated to be assessed at an average of $810,000, with 52 percent being used by non-residents and renters and 48 percent owner-occupants.

The commercial improvements are forecast to have a total cumulative assessed value of $82.8 million.


26

The total net assessed value of the Keeaumoku Development Project properties will total $800.8 million upon build-out. The assessments and associated real property taxes based on current tax rates for resident and other uses during the build-out period and on a stabilized basis are shown below.


Development Period 2018-2020 2021-2023 2024Totals During Build-Out

PeriodStabilized Annually After

Build-out

PUBLIC BENEFITS (Revenues)

1. COUNTY REAL PROPERTY TAXES Assessed Value

Vacant Site $31,905,400 $695,716,200 $0 $727,621,600 $0

Commercial $82,823,000 $82,823,000 $82,823,000

Market Multifamily Residential - Homeowners (After Exemptions) $300,468,000 $300,468,000 $300,468,000 Market Multifamily - Non-Homeowners & Rentals $361,584,000 $361,584,000 $361,584,000

Affordable Multifamily Residential - Homeowners (After Exemptions) $47,001,600 $47,001,600 $47,001,600 Affordable Multifamily Residential - Rentals $13,906,200 $13,906,200 $13,906,200

Total Assessed Value $31,905,400 $695,716,200 $805,782,800 $1,533,404,400 $805,782,800

Real Property Taxes

Vacant Site $395,627 $8,626,881 $0 $$8,626,881

Commercial $1,027,005 $$1,027,005 $1,027,005

Market Multifamily Residential - Homeowners (After Exemptions) $1,051,638 $$1,051,638 $1,051,638

Market Multifamily Residential - Non-Full Time Residents and Rentals $1,627,128 $$1,627,128 $1,627,128

Affordable Multifamily Residential - Homeowners (After Exemptions) $164,506 $$164,506 $164,506

Affordable Multifamily Residential - Rentals $62,578 $$62,578 $62,578

Total Real Property Taxes During Period $395,627 $8,626,881 $3,932,855 $12,955,363 $3,932,855


PUBLIC COST AND BENEFITS ASSESSMENT ASSOCIATED WITH KEEAUMOKU DEVELOPMENT PROJECT


We estimate the County will receive some $13 million in real property tax receipts during the build-out/absorption period from 2018 through 2024 and annual collections of $3.9 million on a stabilized basis thereafter.

COUNTY SECONDARY RECEIPTS AND TOTAL TAXES FROM KEEAUMOKU DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Real Property Taxes (RPT) are forecast to generate about 35.5 percent of total Honolulu County General Fund revenues in the 2018-19 fiscal-year budget, with secondary taxes and fees the forming the remainder. It is logical to assume the Keeaumoku Development Project development and business activities will generate secondary taxes in proportion to RPT as does the overall Oahu community.

The secondary Honolulu County receipts are equal to 181 percent of the RPT total (64.5% divided by 35.5%).

Application of the total tax revenue ratio of 2.81 against the real property taxes received from Keeaumoku Development Project, plus inclusion of an allowance of $1 million for potential County impact fees, results in a cumulative total estimated County tax collection from the subject


27

of $37.4 million during the initial projection period through 2024, and $11.1 million annually on a stabilized basis.

INCOME TAXES (TO STATE OF HAWAII)

The State of Hawaii will receive an estimated $17.6 million in primary receipts from State Income Taxes from worker wages, and profits from businesses based on average statewide corporate and personal payments rates of 4.4 percent and 5.1 percent, respectively, applied against the economic model forecasts. This represents only new/added taxable items resulting from Keeaumoku Development Project and does not include the resident household incomes.

On an annualized basis after stabilization of the community in 2024, the State will generate income taxes of $1.6 million.




Build-out


2. STATE INCOME TAXES

Taxable Personal Income (Wages Only, No Household Income) $17,070,501 $210,517,831 $21,446,685 $249,035,017 $$21,446,685

Taxable Corporate Profits $5,954,200 $94,092,530 $11,537,366 $111,584,096 $$11,537,366

Personal Taxes Paid $870,596 $10,736,409 $1,093,781 $12,700,786 $$1,093,781

Corporate Taxes Paid $261,985 $4,140,071 $507,644 $4,909,700 $$507,644

TOTAL STATE INCOME TAXES $1,132,580 $14,876,481 $1,601,425 $17,610,486 $1,601,425




INCLUDES ONLY THOSE TAXES WHICH ARE "NEW" TO OAHU AS RESULT OF THE PROJECT

GROSS EXCISE TAXES (TO STATE OF HAWAII)

The State will collect Gross Excise Taxes (GET) of 4.166 percent on the gross amount of building contracts, construction supplies, spending by workers and residents, and from the on-going business activity (commercial, association and maintenance). During the construction, absorption and ramp-up period these receipts will total $35.5 million and a stabilized amount of $4 million annually.


28




Build-out


3. STATE GROSS EXCISE TAX

Taxable Transactions

Construction Contracts $42,530,000 $672,089,500 $0 $714,619,500

Worker Disposable Income Purchases (Wages Only, No Household Income) $10,242,300 $126,310,699 $19,455,133 $156,008,132 $19,455,133

Commercial Component Sales and Maintenance & Common Area Spending $0 $0 $76,915,770 $76,915,770 $76,915,770

Total Taxable Transactions $52,772,300 $798,400,199 $96,370,903 $947,543,402 $96,370,903

TOTAL STATE EXCISE TAX $2,198,863 $33,266,941 $4,015,486 $35,465,805 $4,015,486





STATE SECONDARY RECEIPTS AND TOTAL TAXES FROM KEEAUMOKU DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

In recent fiscal years, Income Tax and GET have generated about 46 percent of total State revenues, and secondary taxes and fees the remainder. We anticipate Keeaumoku Development Project activity will result in similar ratios of secondary taxes flowing from the project relative to the primary sources quantified.

The secondary State receipts are equal to .15 times the Income Tax and GET totals (46% divided by 54%).

Application of the total tax ratio of 1.15 to the Keeaumoku Development Project income tax and GET sums, plus the addition of an allowance for potential Sate impact fees of $1.0 million, results in a cumulative total estimated tax collection from the subject of $61.9 million during the initial forecasting period through 2024, and $17.5 million annually on a stabilized basis.

TOTAL COUNTY AND STATE DIRECT AND SECONDARY TAX RECEIPTS

The total direct, secondary and impact fees flowing to the County and State as tax receipts from the development, absorption, occupation and operation of Keeaumoku Development Project will be $98.3 million from 2018 through 2024, and $17.5 million annually on a stabilized basis, as summarized below.


29




Build-out

TOTAL GROSS PUBLIC REVENUES

To County of Honolulu (Item #1) $395,627 $8,626,881 $3,932,855 $12,955,363 $3,932,855

Adjustment for Other Proportional Taxes 2.81 2.81 2.81 2.81 2.81

Adjusted Honolulu County Revenues $1,111,712 $24,241,535 $11,051,322 $36,404,569 $11,051,322

Plus Impact Fees (2) $1,000,000 $0 $0 $1,000,000

Total County of Honolulu Receipts $2,111,712 $24,241,535 $11,051,322 $37,404,569 $11,051,322

To State (Items #2 & #3) $3,331,444 $48,143,422 $5,616,911 $53,076,291 $5,616,911

Adjustment for Other Proportional Taxes (3) 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15

Adjusted State Revenues $3,821,166 $55,220,505 $6,442,597 $60,878,505 $6,442,597

Plus Impact Fees (4) $1,000,000 $0 $0 $1,000,000

Total State of Hawaii Receipts $4,821,166 $55,220,505 $6,442,597 $61,878,505 $6,442,597

AGGREGATE TAX REVENUES $5,932,878 $79,462,040 $17,493,919 $98,283,074 $17,493,919


INCLUDES ONLY THOSE REVENUES AND COSTS WHICH ARE "NEW" TO OAHU



COUNTY AND STATE PER CAPITA EXPENDITURES

The new/additional per capita cost for the County and State associated with the non-resident population component at Keeaumoku Development Project was calculated as follows based on the 2018-19 fiscal year budgets for each as shown.

Honolulu County Operating Budget $2,450,000,000Honolulu County Capital Budget $956,000,000Total County Budget $3,406,000,000Divided by Total County De Facto Population (Residents & Tourists)

1,080,595

County Per Capita Fiscal Year Expense $3,152

State of Hawaii Operating Budget $14,110,600,000State of Hawaii Capital Budget $2,289,700,000Total State Budget $16,400,300,000Divided by Total State De Facto Population (Residents & Tourists)

1,646,592

State Per Capita Fiscal Year Expense $9,960

CALCULATION OF PER CAPITA GOVERNMENTAL COSTS FOR FISCAL-YEAR 2018-19


30

TOTAL COUNTY AND STATE NEW PER CAPITA COSTS FROM KEEAUMOKU DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

The total new governmental costs on a periodic basis for Keeaumoku Development Project to service the non-resident component of the de facto population of the project for the development period and as stabilized are on the following chart.




Build-out

PUBLIC COSTS (Expenses)

By County of Honolulu $0 $0 $421,358 $421,358 $421,358

By State of Hawaii $0 $0 $1,331,480 $1,331,480 $1,331,480

TOTAL PUBLIC COSTS $0 $0 $1,752,838 $1,752,838 $1,752,838





The total added operating and capital costs to the County of Honolulu will stabilize at $422,000 annually. The total added per capita costs to the State of Hawaii budget will be $1.3 million per year as stabilized.

TOTAL NET PUBLIC BENEFITS TO COUNTY AND STATE FROM KEEAUMOKU DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

As shown below, both the County and the State will be provided with a net positive benefit (or "profit") from Keeaumoku Development Project in each development period and on an annual stabilized basis.


31




Build-out

TOTAL NET PUBLIC BENEFITS

To County of Honolulu $2,111,712 $24,241,535 $10,629,964 $36,983,211 $10,629,964

To State of Hawaii $4,821,166 $55,220,505 $5,111,117 $60,547,025 $5,111,117

AGGREGATE NET BENEFITS $6,932,878 $79,462,040 $15,741,081 $97,530,236 $15,741,081

(2) Estimated special assessments of $1,000,000.

(3) Gross Excise and Income Taxes comprise 87.1 percent of collected General Fund revenues; other revenue items 12.9 percent, or an additional 14.7% percent above income and gross excise taxes. Or a multiplier of 1.147.

(4) Assumes no Department of Education School Construction Assessment Fee. Estimated other special assessments at $1,000,000.



(1) Real property taxes comprise 35.5 percent of General Fund in the County of Honolulu 2018-19 budget. Economic activity generates other revenue items of 64.5 percent or additional 181 percent above real property taxes, or multiplier of 2.81..



The net benefit to Honolulu County will total $37.0 million during build-out and stabilize at $10.7 million per year. The State of Hawaii will have net fiscal benefits of $60.5 million during construction and $5.1 million per year thereafter.

Assumptions and Limiting Conditions

32


1. CBRE, Inc. through its appraiser (collectively, "CBRE") has inspected through reasonable observation the subject property. However, it is not possible or reasonably practicable to personally inspect conditions beneath the soil and the entire interior and exterior of the improvements on the subject property. Therefore, no representation is made as to such matters.

2. The report, including its conclusions and any portion of such report (the "Report"), is as of the date set forth in the letter of transmittal and based upon the information, market, economic, and property conditions and projected levels of operation existing as of such date. The dollar amount of any conclusion as to value in the Report is based upon the purchasing power of the U.S. Dollar on such date. The Report is subject to change as a result of fluctuations in any of the foregoing. CBRE has no obligation to revise the Report to reflect any such fluctuations or other events or conditions which occur subsequent to such date.

3. Unless otherwise expressly noted in the Report, CBRE has assumed that:

(i) Title to the subject property is clear and marketable and that there are no recorded or unrecorded matters or exceptions to title that would adversely affect marketability or value. CBRE has not examined title records (including without limitation liens, encumbrances, easements, deed restrictions, and other conditions that may affect the title or use of the subject property) and makes no representations regarding title or its limitations on the use of the subject property. Insurance against financial loss that may arise out of defects in title should be sought from a qualified title insurance company.

(ii) Existing improvements on the subject property conform to applicable local, state, and federal building codes and ordinances, are structurally sound and seismically safe, and have been built and repaired in a workmanlike manner according to standard practices; all building systems (mechanical/electrical, HVAC, elevator, plumbing, etc.) are in good working order with no major deferred maintenance or repair required; and the roof and exterior are in good condition and free from intrusion by the elements. CBRE has not retained independent structural, mechanical, electrical, or civil engineers in connection with this appraisal and, therefore, makes no representations relative to the condition of improvements. CBRE appraisers are not engineers and are not qualified to judge matters of an engineering nature, and furthermore structural problems or building system problems may not be visible. It is expressly assumed that any purchaser would, as a precondition to closing a sale, obtain a satisfactory engineering report relative to the structural integrity of the property and the integrity of building systems.

(iii) Any proposed improvements, on or off-site, as well as any alterations or repairs considered will be completed in a workmanlike manner according to standard practices.

(iv) Hazardous materials are not present on the subject property. CBRE is not qualified to detect such substances. The presence of substances such as asbestos, urea formaldehyde foam insulation, contaminated groundwater, mold, or other potentially hazardous materials may affect the value of the property.

(v) No mineral deposit or subsurface rights of value exist with respect to the subject property, whether gas, liquid, or solid, and no air or development rights of value may be transferred. CBRE has not considered any rights associated with extraction or exploration of any resources, unless otherwise expressly noted in the Report.

(vi) There are no contemplated public initiatives, governmental development controls, rent controls, or changes in the present zoning ordinances or regulations governing use, density, or shape that would significantly affect the value of the subject property.

(vii) All required licenses, certificates of occupancy, consents, or other legislative or administrative authority from any local, state, nor national government or private entity or organization have been or can be readily obtained or renewed for any use on which the Report is based.

(viii) The subject property is managed and operated in a prudent and competent manner, neither inefficiently or super-efficiently.

(ix) The subject property and its use, management, and operation are in full compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local regulations, laws, and restrictions, including without limitation environmental laws, seismic hazards, flight patterns, decibel levels/noise envelopes, fire hazards, hillside ordinances, density, allowable uses, building codes, permits, and licenses.

(x) The subject property is in full compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). CBRE is not qualified to assess the subject property's compliance with the ADA, notwithstanding any discussion of possible readily achievable barrier removal construction items in the Report.


33

(xi) All information regarding the areas and dimensions of the subject property furnished to CBRE are correct, and no encroachments exist. CBRE has neither undertaken any survey of the boundaries of the subject property nor reviewed or confirmed the accuracy of any legal description of the subject property.

Unless otherwise expressly noted in the Report, no issues regarding the foregoing were brought to CBRE's attention, and CBRE has no knowledge of any such facts affecting the subject property. If any information inconsistent with any of the foregoing assumptions is discovered, such information could have a substantial negative impact on the Report. Accordingly, if any such information is subsequently made known to CBRE, CBRE reserves the right to amend the Report, which may include the conclusions of the Report. CBRE assumes no responsibility for any conditions regarding the foregoing, or for any expertise or knowledge required to discover them. Any user of the Report is urged to retain an expert in the applicable field(s) for information regarding such conditions.

4. CBRE has assumed that all documents, data and information furnished by or behalf of the client, property owner, or owner's representative are accurate and correct, unless otherwise expressly noted in the Report. Such data and information include, without limitation, numerical street addresses, lot and block numbers, Assessor's Parcel Numbers, land dimensions, square footage area of the land, dimensions of the improvements, gross building areas, net rentable areas, usable areas, unit count, room count, rent schedules, income data, historical operating expenses, budgets, and related data. Any error in any of the above could have a substantial impact on the Report. Accordingly, if any such errors are subsequently made known to CBRE, CBRE reserves the right to amend the Report, which may include the conclusions of the Report. The client and intended user should carefully review all assumptions, data, relevant calculations, and conclusions of the Report and should immediately notify CBRE of any questions or errors within 30 days after the date of delivery of the Report.

5. CBRE assumes no responsibility (including any obligation to procure the same) for any documents, data or information not provided to CBRE, including without limitation any termite inspection, survey or occupancy permit.

6. All furnishings, equipment and business operations have been disregarded with only real property being considered in the Report, except as otherwise expressly stated and typically considered part of real property.

7. Any cash flows included in the analysis are forecasts of estimated future operating characteristics based upon the information and assumptions contained within the Report. Any projections of income, expenses and economic conditions utilized in the Report, including such cash flows, should be considered as only estimates of the expectations of future income and expenses as of the date of the Report and not predictions of the future. Actual results are affected by a number of factors outside the control of CBRE, including without limitation fluctuating economic, market, and property conditions. Actual results may ultimately differ from these projections, and CBRE does not warrant any such projections.

8. The Report contains professional opinions and is expressly not intended to serve as any warranty, assurance or guarantee of any particular value of the subject property. Other appraisers may reach different conclusions as to the value of the subject property. Furthermore, market value is highly related to exposure time, promotion effort, terms, motivation, and conclusions surrounding the offering of the subject property. The Report is for the sole purpose of providing the intended user with CBRE's independent professional opinion of the value of the subject property as of the date of the Report. Accordingly, CBRE shall not be liable for any losses that arise from any investment or lending decisions based upon the Report that the client, intended user, or any buyer, seller, investor, or lending institution may undertake related to the subject property, and CBRE has not been compensated to assume any of these risks. Nothing contained in the Report shall be construed as any direct or indirect recommendation of CBRE to buy, sell, hold, or finance the subject property.

9. No opinion is expressed on matters which may require legal expertise or specialized investigation or knowledge beyond that customarily employed by real estate appraisers. Any user of the Report is advised to retain experts in areas that fall outside the scope of the real estate appraisal profession for such matters.

10. CBRE assumes no responsibility for any costs or consequences arising due to the need, or the lack of need, for flood hazard insurance. An agent for the Federal Flood Insurance Program should be contacted to determine the actual need for Flood Hazard Insurance.

11. Acceptance or use of the Report constitutes full acceptance of these Assumptions and Limiting Conditions and any special assumptions set forth in the Report. It is the responsibility of the user of the Report to read in full, comprehend and thus become aware of all such assumptions and limiting conditions. CBRE assumes no responsibility for any situation arising out of the user's failure to become familiar with and understand the same.


34

12. The Report applies to the property as a whole only, and any pro ration or division of the title into fractional interests will invalidate such conclusions, unless the Report expressly assumes such pro ration or division of interests.

13. The allocations of the total value estimate in the Report between land and improvements apply only to the existing use of the subject property. The allocations of values for each of the land and improvements are not intended to be used with any other property or appraisal and are not valid for any such use.

14. The maps, plats, sketches, graphs, photographs, and exhibits included in this Report are for illustration purposes only and shall be utilized only to assist in visualizing matters discussed in the Report. No such items shall be removed, reproduced, or used apart from the Report.

15. The Report shall not be duplicated or provided to any unintended users in whole or in part without the written consent of CBRE, which consent CBRE may withhold in its sole discretion. Exempt from this restriction is duplication for the internal use of the intended user and its attorneys, accountants, or advisors for the sole benefit of the intended user. Also exempt from this restriction is transmission of the Report pursuant to any requirement of any court, governmental authority, or regulatory agency having jurisdiction over the intended user, provided that the Report and its contents shall not be published, in whole or in part, in any public document without the written consent of CBRE, which consent CBRE may withhold in its sole discretion. Finally, the Report shall not be made available to the public or otherwise used in any offering of the property or any security, as defined by applicable law. Any unintended user who may possess the Report is advised that it shall not rely upon the Report or its conclusions and that it should rely on its own appraisers, advisors and other consultants for any decision in connection with the subject property. CBRE shall have no liability or responsibility to any such unintended user.

Addenda

ADDENDA

Addenda

Addendum A

ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS TABLES

TTABLE A - SUMMARY

CCumulative DDuring Build-Out SStabilized Annually

MModel Item PPeriod TThereafter

Direct Capital Investment $$714,619,500

Local Contractor's Profits $$71,461,950

Local Supplier's Profits $$28,584,780

Worker Years of Jobs 33,628 7748

Employee Wages $$249,035,017 $$21,446,685

Total De Facto Population 22,219

Non-Resident Average Daily Population 1134

Full-Time Resident Household Income $$218,911,392 $$218,911,392

De Facto Population Expenditures (On & Off Site) $$126,988,388 $$126,988,388

Total Operating/Business Activity Gross Receipts $$76,915,770 $$76,915,770

Total Oahu "Base" Economic Impact $$918,523,658 $$203,904,158

CCounty of Honolulu Gross Tax Receipts $$37,404,569 $$11,051,322

SState of Hawaii Gross Tax Receipts $$61,878,505 $$6,442,597

CCounty of Honolulu Costs of Services (per capita basis) $$421,358 $$421,358

SState Costs of Services (per capita basis) $$1,331,480 $$1,331,480

CCounty of Honolulu Net Benefits or (Loss) $$36,983,211 $$10,629,964

SState Net Benefits or (Loss) $$60,547,025 $$5,111,117


IINCLUDES ONLY THOSE TAXES AND COSTS WHICH ARE "NEW" TO OAHU AS RESULT OF THE PROJECT

SUMMARY COMPARISON OF MAJOR ECONOMIC IMPACTSAND PUBLIC FISCAL COSTS/BENEFITS

Keeaumoku Development ProjectAll Amounts Expressed in Constant, Uninflated 2018 Dollars

TTABLE A1

Pre-Development Construction Absorption & OOccupancy

Project Year 2018-2020 2021-2023 2024Totals During

BBuild-Out


Tower and Commercial Construction - Direct/Hard Costs (2) $504,499,500 $$504,499,500

Project Expenses - Indirect/Soft Costs (3) $42,530,000 $127,590,000 $$170,120,000

TOTAL PERIODIC CONSTRUCTION COSTS $42,530,000 $672,089,500 $0 $714,619,500

Contractor Profits (4) $4,253,000 $67,208,950 $0 $$71,461,950

Supplier Profits (5) $1,701,200 $26,883,580 $0 $$28,584,780

(1) Includes all pre-construction site work, on and off-site infrastructure and finish work (hardscape and accessways & open space).

(3) Estimated at 32.5 percent of site work and direct construction costs; or 24.5 percent of total "all in" costs.




(2) Estimated at $475 per square foot for 939,800 square feet of gross residential floor area and $525 per square foot for 82,815 square feet of gross commercial floor area. Includes all amenities, common areas and parking.

Total cost estimates provided by Developer, allocated by CBRE/Hallstrom Team based on similar urban projects.

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE AND ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR THE KEEAUMOKU DEVELOPMENT PROJECT


TTABLE A2



OOut

Site Work/Infrastructure Emplacement (1) 100 100

Tower and Commercial Construction (2) 1,682 1,682

Project Architectural & Engineering, Entitlement, Professional Fees and AAdministration (3)

155 464 619

Residential Construction

Total Periodic Construction Jobs 155 2,246 0 2,400

On-Going Business Employment Stabilized

Annually

Commercial Worker Years (4) 259 259 259

Maintenance & Common Element (5) 62 62 62

Total Periodic On-Going Business Jobs 320 320 320

Off-Site Employment (6) 52 749 107 907 107

TOTAL PERIODIC WORKER YEARS 206 2,994 427 3,628 748

(1) Infrastructure construction employment estimated at 1 worker-year for every $400,000 in costs.

(2) Vertical construction employment estimated at 1 worker-year for every $300,000 in costs.

(3) Project planning and administration employment estimated at 1 worker-year for every $275,000 in costs.

(4) Commercial employment estimated at 1 full-time-equivalent worker for every 350 square feet of gross floor area. First stores opening 2024

(6) Estimated at one cumulative off-site employment position for every three on site positions.


(5) Includes Association of Apartment Owners and commercial common element administration, security and maintenance staff of 14 jobs. One in-unit maintenance/renovation worker for every 20 units.

ESTIMATED YEARLY FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT EMPLOYMENT POSITIONS CREATED BY THE KEEAUMOKU DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

TTABLE A3



OOut


Tower and Commercial Construction (1) $119,169,509 $$119,169,509

Project Architectural & Engineering, Entitlement, Professional Fees and AAdministration (2) $14,201,613 $42,604,838 $$56,806,450

Total Periodic Construction/Development Wages $14,201,613 $168,860,746 $0 $183,062,359

Stabilized

On-Going Business Wages Annually

Commercial (3) $12,716,935 $12,716,935 $$12,716,935

Maintenance & Common Element (4) $2,785,968 $2,785,968 $$2,785,968

Total Periodic On-Going Business Wages $15,502,903 $15,502,903 $15,502,903

Off-Site Employment Wages (5) $2,868,888 $41,657,085 $5,943,781 $50,469,754 $$5,943,781

TOTAL PERIODIC WAGES $17,070,501 $210,517,831 $21,446,685 $249,035,017 $21,446,685

All wages based on 2017 "Occupational Employment Statistics (OES) survey, escalated to 2018 at 3%

(1) Mean annual wage for "Construction and Extraction Occupations" (SOC Code 45-000) at $68,800/year for 2017, escalated to 2018.

(5) Mean annual wage for "All Occupations" (SOC Code 00-000) at $54,030/year for 2017, escalated to 2018.

Wages taken from State of Hawaii "Hawaii Workforce Infonet" "Publications and Tables> Production Worker H&E Data Hours and Earnings" for 2016.


(3) Weighted mean annual wage for "Sales and Related Occupations" (SOC Code 41-000) at $36,390 for 2017 and "Business and Financial Occupations", escalated to 2018. Indicated mean wage of $49,192.

(4) Weighted mean annual wage for "Building & Ground Maintenance" (SOC Code 37-000) at $34,090 for 2017, "Office & Administrative Occupations" (SOC Code 43-000) at $40,020 for 2017, and "Installation, Maintenance & Repair Ocupations" (SOC Code 49-000) for 2017. Escalated to 2018 with indicated meand wage of $45,008.

ESTIMATED YEARLY EMPLOYEE WAGES CREATED BY THE KEEAUMOKU DEVELOPMENT PROJECT


(2) Weighted mean annual wage for "Business and Financial Operations Occupations" (SOC Code 13-000) at $69.830/year in 2017, "Architectural & Engineering" (17-000) at $82,900, and "Management Occupations" (11-000) at $107,750, escalated to 2018. Indicated mean wage of $91,828.

TTABLE A4

Absorption/Occupancy

2024/Stabilized

Total Number of Residential Units 964 Market-Priced Units (87% of Total) 836 Workforce/Affordable Priced (13% of Total) 128

Market-Priced Multifamily Units Total Number of Units 836 Resident Units 669 Percent of Total Townhouses 80% Non-Resident Units 167 Percent of Total Townhouses 20% Resident Population (1) 1,778 Non-Resident Population (2) 134

Workforce/Affordable-Priced Multifamily Units Total Number of Units 128 Resident Units 128 Percent of Total Units 100% Non-Resident Units 0 Percent of Total Units 0% Resident Population (3) 307 Non-Resident Population 0

Total Resident Population 2,085

Total Non-Resident Population 134

TOTAL DE FACTO POPULATION 2,219

RESIDENT HOUSEHOLD INCOME (4)

Annually $218,911,392

NON-RESIDENT SPENDING (5)

Annually $6,587,122

TOTAL DISCRETIONARY EXPENDITURES (6)

Annually $126,988,388

(1) Resident market-priced multifamily households estimated to have average size of 2.6 persons, with average occupancy of 100%.

(3) Affordable-priced multifamily households estimated to have average size of 2.4 persons, with average occupancy of 100%.

Source: CBRE/Hallstrom Team.

ESTIMATED DE FACTO POPULATION, RESIDENT HOUSEHOLD INCOME AND DISCRETIONARY EXPENDITURES FOR THE KEEAUMOKU DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

(2) Non- resident market-priced multifamily parties estimated to have average size of 2.4 persons (resident size plus some 10%), with average occupancy of 30%.

(4) The median household income for a three-person household on Oahu is estimated at $105,000 for 2018.

(6) Includes 55% of resident household income and 100 percent of non-resident spending.

(5) Estimated at $135 per day (typical visitor daily spending excluding lodging of $110 and $25 per day alowance for household furnishings), all of which is discretionary.


TTABLE A5


2018-2020 2021-2023 2024 Stabilized Annually

Commercial Businesses (1)

Annual Sales Activity $67,871,650 $$67,871,650

Maintenance & Common Element (2)

Annual Activity $9,044,120 $$9,044,120

Total Economic Activity

ANNUAL ACTIVITY AT END-OF-PERIOD $76,915,770 $76,915,770

(1) Estimated based on average annual sales of $1,100 per square foot for ground floor and $550 per square foot for second floor.

(2) Estimated as shown below.

Site/Ext. Renos. Number of Units Total Expenses

Market Multifamily (1) $4,800 $5,000 853 $8,359,400

Affordable Multifamily (2) $3,840 $2,500 108 $684,720




PROJECTED ON-SITE OPERATING ECONOMIC ACTIVITY AT KEEAUMOKU DEVELOPMENT PROJECT


Average Site/Exterior Maintenance and Renovations Cost per Year

TTABLE A6


2018-2020 2021-2023 2024 Totals During Build-Out SStabilized Annually

Construction Activity

Construction Wages $14,201,613 $168,860,746 $$183,062,359

Contractor Profits $4,253,000 $67,208,950 $$71,461,950

Supplier Profits $1,701,200 $26,883,580 $$28,584,780

Other Construction Costs $22,374,187 $409,136,224 $$431,510,411

Total Construction Impact $42,530,000 $672,089,500 $714,619,500

De Facto Population Spending

AAnnually Annually $126,988,388 $$126,988,388 $126,988,388

On-Site Economic Activity

Annual Commercial Business Activity (1) $67,871,650 $$67,871,650 $67,871,650

Annual Maintenance & Common Element $9,044,120 $$9,044,120 $9,044,120

TOTAL BASE ECONOMIC IMPACT

Annually $42,530,000 $672,089,500 $203,904,158 $918,523,658 $203,904,158

(1) Assumes 10% of business activity generated by Keaaumoku Village residents spending, previously accounted for, and adjusted accoundingly.


SUMMARY OF ECONOMIC IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH DEVELIOPMENT OF THE KEEAUMOKU DEVELOPMENT PROJECT


TTABLE A7



OOut

Construction Costs $42,530,000 $$672,089,500 $0 $$714,621,524

1. Economic Output Multiplier 1.95 1.95 1.95 1.95 Total State Economic Output $$82,933,500 $1,310,574,525 $$0 $1,393,511,972

2. Earnings Multiplier 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 Total Increase in State Earnings $$25,518,000 $403,253,700 $$0 $428,772,914

3. State Tax Multipliers 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 Total Increase in State Taxes $$5,303,491 $83,809,561 $$0 $89,113,304

4. Total Job Multipliers 10.90 10.90 10.90 10.90 Total State Jobs Created 4463.6 7,325.8 00.0 7,789.4

Construction Employment 155 22,246 0 22,400

5. Direct-Effect Job Multipliers 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 Total Direct Jobs Created 3348.0 5,052.7 00.0 5,400.6

Construction Wages $14,201,613 $$168,860,746 $0 $$183,062,359

6. Direct-Effect Earnings 1.74 1.74 1.74 1.74 Total Increase in Direct Earnings $$24,710,806 $293,817,699 $$0 $318,528,505


ESTIMATES OF TOTAL ECONOMIC IMPACT FROM SUBJECT CONSTRUCTION

All Amounts Expressed in Constant 2018 DollarsUSING STATE INPUT-OUTPUT MODEL "TYPE II" MULTIPLIERS FOR KEEAUMOKU DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

TTABLE A8

PPre-Development Construction Absorption & OOccupancy


OOut Stabilized Annually

Economic Activity $203,904,158 $$203,904,158 $203,904,158

1. Economic Output Multiplier 1.92 1.92 1.92 Total State Economic Output $$390,816,302 $390,816,302 $$390,816,302

2. Earnings Multiplier 0.63 0.63 0.63 Total Increase in State Earnings $$127,779,939 $127,779,939 $$127,779,939

3. State Tax Multipliers 0.13 0.13 0.13 Total Increase in State Taxes $$25,861,844 $25,861,844 $$25,861,844

4. Total Job Multipliers 17.13 17.13 17.13 Total State Jobs Created 33,493.6 3,493.6 33,493.6

Operating Employment 427 4427 427

5. Direct-Effect Job Multipliers 1.51 1.51 1.51 Total Direct Jobs Created 6646.5 646.5 6646.5

Operating Wages $21,446,685 $$21,446,685 $21,446,685

6. Direct-Effect Earnings 1.64 1.64 1.64 Total Increase in Direct Earnings $$35,244,052 $35,244,052 $$35,244,052


ESTIMATES OF TOTAL ECONOMIC IMPACT FROM SUBJECT OPERATIONSUSING STATE INPUT-OUTPUT MODEL "TYPE II" MULTIPLIERS KEEAUMOKU DEVELOPMENT PROJECT


Addenda

Addendum B

PUBLIC FISCAL (COST BENEFIT) ASSESSMENT TABLES

TTABLE B1 - SUMMARY



PPeriodStabilized Annually

AAfter Build-out



Vacant Site $31,905,400 $695,716,200 $0 $727,621,600 $0

Commercial $82,823,000 $82,823,000 $82,823,000



Total Assessed Value $$31,905,400 $695,716,200 $$805,782,800 $1,533,404,400 $$805,782,800

Real Property Taxes

Vacant Site $395,627 $8,626,881 $0 $$8,626,881

Commercial $1,027,005 $$1,027,005 $1,027,005























Plus Impact Fees (2) $1,000,000 $0 $0 $1,000,000


To State (Items #2 & #3) $3,331,444 $48,143,422 $5,616,911 $53,076,291 $5,616,911



Plus Impact Fees (4) $1,000,000 $0 $0 $1,000,000















TTABLE B2 - COUNTY REVENUES




AAfter Build-out



Vacant Site $31,905,400 $695,716,200 $0 $727,621,600 $0

Commercial $82,823,000 $82,823,000 $82,823,000



Total Assessed Value $$31,905,400 $695,716,200 $$805,782,800 $1,533,404,400 $$805,782,800

Real Property Taxes

Vacant Site $395,627 $8,626,881 $0 $$8,626,881

Commercial $1,027,005 $$1,027,005 $1,027,005








TTABLE B3 - STATE REVENUES




AAfter Build-out


















TTABLE B4 - SUMMARY COSTS AND BENEFITS




AAfter Build-out





Plus Impact Fees (2) $1,000,000 $0 $0 $1,000,000


To State (Items #2 & #3) $3,331,444 $48,143,422 $5,616,911 $53,076,291 $5,616,911



Plus Impact Fees (4) $1,000,000 $0 $0 $1,000,000














Addenda

Addendum C

QUALIFICATIONS

PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS OF THOMAS W. HOLLIDAY, CRE, FRICS Business Affiliation Director The Hallstrom Team | CBRE, Inc. Valuation & Advisory Services Honolulu, Hawaii (2015 – Present) Senior Analyst/ The Hallstrom Group, Inc. Supervisor Honolulu, Hawaii (1980 – 2014) Former Staff Appraiser Davis-Baker Appraisal Co. Avalon, Santa Catalina Island, California

(1977 -1979) International Designation CRE Designation (2015) - The Counselors of Real Estate and Membership FRICS Designation (2016)–Fellow of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors Education/Qualifications California State University, Fullerton (Communications/Journalism) More than 600 Hawaii Hotel/Hospitality Valuation and

Consulting Assignments More than 150 Market Studies, Economic Impact Analyses and

Public Fiscal Assessments for Proposed Projects and Entitlement Purposes

Qualified expert witness testimony before State of Hawaii Land Use Commission, County Planning Commissions, County Councils and various state and county boards and agencies since 1983.

Only certified real estate economist by County of Kauai for workforce housing assessments.

Numerous SREA, Appraisal Institute and RICS Courses Numerous professional seminars and clinics. Contributing author to Hawaii Real Estate Investor, Honolulu Star Bulletin, Pacific Business News, Other Publications On January 1, 1991, the American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers

(AIREA) and the Society of Real Estate Appraisers (SREA) consolidated, forming the Appraisal Institute (AI).

Recent Assignments Market Study, Economic Impact Analyses and Public Costs/ Benefits (Fiscal Impact) Assessments Oahu -- OHA Kakaako Makai (Mixed-Use Project) -- Howard Hughes/Ward Kewalo Basin (Retail Project) -- Marriott Waikiki Parking Lot (Hotel/Timeshare Project) -- Residence Inn Kapolei (Hotel) -- Turtle Bay Resort (Destination Resort Community) -- Waikapu Country Town (Mixed-Use Community) -- Oahu Community Correctional Center Relocation -- Oahu Tourism Spending/Tax Impact Analysis -- Waikapu Country Town (Mixed-Use Community)

Professional Qualifications of Thomas W. Holliday (continued) Maui County -- Waikapu Country Town (Mixed-Use Community) -- Lanai City Expansion (Mixed-Use/201H Community) -- Polanui Garden (201H Residential Community) -- Molokai Ranch Holdings (Mixed-Use) -- Makila Rural Subdivision (201H Residential Community) -- Makila Kai (201H Residential Community) -- Maui Research & Tech Park (Mixed-Use Community) -- Maui Lani (Mixed-Use Community) -- Honuaula (Mixed-Use Community) -- Makena Beach Resort -- Maui Business Park, Phase II (Industrial/Commercial) -- Kapalua Mauka (Master Planned Community) -- Hailiimaile (Mixed-Use Master Planned Community) -- Pulelehua (Master Planned Community) -- Westin Kaanapali Ocean Villas Expansion (Resort/Timeshare) Big Island -- Parker Ranch Waimea Town Center (Mixed-Use) -- West Hawaii/Gold Coast Tourism & Hotel Analysis -- Puako Farms/Kamakoa (Residential Subdivision) -- Kau Tea Farm (Agricultural/Mixed-Use Project) -- Kamakana Villages (Mixed-Use Residential Development) -- W.H. Shipman Ltd, Master Plan (Various Urban Uses) -- Nani Kahuku Aina (Mixed-Use Resort Community -- Kona Kai Ola (Mixed-Use Resort Community) -- Waikoloa Highlands (Residential) -- Waikoloa Heights (Mixed-Use Residential Development) Kauai -- Princeville Lodge (Hotel) -- Princeville Phase II (Destination Resort Community) -- Hanalei Plantation Workforce Housing (Resort) -- Lima Ola (Residential Community) -- Coco Palms (Hotel) -- Sheraton Kauai Workforce Housing (Resort) -- Coconut Coast Tourism and Hotel Analysis -- Hanalei Plantation Resort (Resort/Residential) -- Kukuiula (Resort/Residential) -- Waipono/Puhi (Mixed-Use Planned Development) -- Eleele Commercial Expansion (Commercial) -- Village at Poipu (Resort/Residential) -- Ocean Bay Plantation (Resort/Residential)

Professional Qualifications of Thomas W. Holliday (continued) Major Neighbor Island Valuation Assignments -- Mauna Lani Bay Hotel -- Courtyard Kahului Airport Hotel -- Maui Oceanfront Days Inn -- Holiday Inn Express – Kona Hotel (proposed) -- Keauhou Beach Hotel -- Courtyard King Kamehameha Kona Beach Hotel -- Aloha Beach Resort -- Coco Palms Resort -- Grand Hyatt Kauai -- Islander on the Beach -- Waimea Plantation Cottages -- Coconut Beach Resort -- Sheraton Maui Hotel -- Outrigger Wailea Resort Hotel -- Maui Lu Hotel -- Coconut Grove Condominiums -- Palauea Bay Holdings -- Wailea Ranch -- Maui Coast Hotel -- Westin Maui Hotel -- Maui Marriott Hotel -- Waihee Beach -- Kapalua Bay Hotel and The Shops at Kapalua Email Address [email protected]


APPENDIX IX

PRELIMINARY WIND STUDY

Preliminary Pedestrian Level Wind Study

Keeaumoku

- Final


Keeaumoku, Honolulu Hawaii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Keeaumoku, Honolulu, Hawaii


1.0 INTRODUCTION

1



April 29, 2019Job No. 18-H048A

Figure 1.1: Project Site: Keeaumoku St. and Rycroft St., Honolulu, Hawaii

Project Site

2




Figure 1.2: Ground Floor

3




Figure 1.3: 12th Floor

4




Figure 1.4: Project Image

5



2.0 WIND ENVIRONMENT AT THE SITE

6


Preliminary Pedestrian Level Wind Study 7





9




Figure 2.1: The Atmospheric Boundary Layer: Laminar and Turbulent Flow

Tower 2Tower 1

Boun

dary

Lay

er

Laminar Flow Turbulent Flow

Free

Stre

amSurface

Velocity is assumed to be zero at surface

Unsteady

Wind speed increases with height within boundary layer

Wind speed essentially constant above boundary layer

Wind Speed Vector Wind Speed Vector

Velocity is assumed to be zero at surface

10




Figure 2.2: The Atmospheric Boundary Layer: Variation with Exposure Condition

100%

100%

100%

Urban Suburban/Rolling Terrain

Open

Boun

dary

Lay

er

Boun

dary

Lay

er

Boun

dary

La

yer

100% of gradient wind speed

Wind Speed Wind Speed Wind Speed

Heig

ht

Heig

ht

Heig

ht

The height of the boundary layer increases with increasing surface roughness. An urban environment has higher surface roughness than does open country, so the boundary layer is higher in an urban environment. For a given height, the gradient wind speed will be lower in an urban environment than in other exposures, all other things being equal.

Variation of wind speed vs. height is described by the “power law”

11




Figure 2.3: Radius = 20 x Building Height (8,000 ft.)

Project Site

Project Site

12




Figure 2.4: Pedestrian Level Wind Flow Adjacent to Typical High-Rise Tower

Wind striking the face of building can be directed downward (downwash) and accelerated creating unpleasantly windy conditions for pedestrians. Articulated building facades (e.g., those with balconies) can significantly reduce wind acceleration.

13




The wind rose illustrates wind speed, frequency and direction. The length of each spoke corresponds to the frequency the wind blows from a given direction. The concentric circles represent frequency starting from 0% of the time at the center. The color bands illustrate distinct frequency categories showing the percentage of time that winds blow from a given direction within specified speed ranges, as shown in the Legend. The spokes correspond to the 16 cardinal directions (e.g., North, North northeast, Northeast, etc.).

> 24.5 mph

LEGEND

19 – 24.5 mph12 - 19 mph7.5 – 12 mph4 – 7.5 mph1 – 4 mph

Source: National Weather and Climate Center

Figure 2.5 Wind Rose for Honolulu, HI

N

E

W

W

14




Figure 2.6: Monthly Wind Roses for Honolulu, Hawaii

Note: The concentric circles on these wind roses do not all represent the same frequencies because they have been normalized to the same size for presentation purposes. Source: National Weather and Climate Center

15




Figure 2.7: Annual wind rose superimposed over Ground Floor

16



3.0 PEDESTRIAN LEVEL WIND STUDY

17













23




Figure 3.1: Representative Wind Study Model (from a nearby project)

Project Site

24



REFERENCES

25


APPENDIX X

PHOTOS


APPENDIX XI

SEA LEVEL RISE

Keeaumoku Development Special District Permit Application

Documents