Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Culture topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Haiku fire station plans draw objections from land descendants, archaeologist cites 2010 AIS
Summary
Kaneeli e Williams testified that her family’s Kuleana parcel in Haiku would be crossed by a planned waterline for the proposed Haiku fire station and that the family had not consented to construction through their land.
Kaneeli e (Kane) Williams testified that her family’s Kuleana parcel in Haiku is directly affected by the planned Haiku fire station and by a waterline route that would cross private ancestral land. Williams said the family was contacted in October 2024, after the project’s environmental assessment was completed, and that they were not given adequate time or consultation to review analyses. She said the family opposes construction over their land without consent and that archaeological monitoring and negotiation were not completed.
Nut graf: Williams told the committee she is not opposed to a fire station in principle but raised questions about consent, cultural sensitivity and the adequacy of outreach and archaeological review. She said cultural features and possible burials may exist on the parcel and that the family’s counsel has been notified.
County archaeologist Janet Sicks responded by noting an Archaeological Inventory Survey (AIS) and a cultural impact assessment for the site were completed in 2010 and are included as appendices to the environmental documents; she said the AIS documented a historic dry‑stacked rock retaining wall and that the feature was interpreted in the 2010 AIS as a terrace or garden feature likely associated with a mid‑20th‑century residence and not clearly burial‑related. Sicks said that if the project footprint has substantially changed since 2010, or if the community requests, the county’s permitting agency (SHPD/assigning authority) may require supplemental testing or monitoring and that families can request a re‑determination.
Williams said the planned waterline routing through her family’s parcel would affect their property and that alternative routing along the highway could be considered but would require re‑planning and permitting.
Ending: Committee members asked whether the fire department had communicated with the affected families and whether the federal grant status had changed; county staff and the archaeologist said project details (AIS in 2010) are in the public file and that parties can pursue re‑determination or monitoring. No action was taken at the hearing.
