The House Committee on Housing voted to pass several bills and technical amendments intended to speed review of projects that interact with historic properties and to narrow the scope of what triggers review.

Lawmakers approved amendments and technical fixes for HB 738, HB 1008, HB 737 and HB 830; the committee adopted changes recommended by the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) and other agencies to clarify timelines and scope.

Testimony came from SHPD, county preservation staff, developers, housing advocates and nonprofit preservation groups. SHPD Administrator Jessica Puff and agency staff provided comments and agreed to proposals tying review periods to complete project submittals. The committee adopted a 30-day review window for lower-risk projects and clarified that expedited programmatic review can target residential and majority-residential mixed-use transit-oriented developments, subject to further drafting to avoid overburdening SHPD’s resources.

Ted Kefalas of the Grassroot Institute argued the bills would reduce unnecessary delays. “This bill would help ensure historic properties receive appropriate protection, but the ones that don't necessarily need review don't have to go through that process,” he told the panel.

Historic Hawaii Foundation and other preservation advocates sought narrower language in certain exemptions to avoid unintended removal of protections for districts and individually listed properties. The committee accepted an amendment that removes a circular reference in HRS 6E-42.2 so that single-family homes and townhouses remain exempt from review unless they are individually listed, nominated or located in a historic district.

On HB 830, the committee added authority for SHPD to charge applicants for third-party review costs in limited circumstances and set technical amendments to align timing and definitions; members asked SHPD to return with any all-clear language on mixed-use scope before decision making.

Committee members said the package aims to balance speeding project timelines with preservation of cultural resources and local review processes.

All four bills were moved forward with amendments.