HB738 • 2026

RELATING TO HISTORIC PRESERVATION.

Housing

Active

The official status still shows this bill as active or still awaiting another formal step.

Sponsor: EVSLIN, LOWEN, MARTEN, MORIKAWA, NAKAMURA, SOUZA, TAKAYAMA, TAM, TARNAS, Amato
Last action: 2025-12-08
Official status: Carried over to 2026 Regular Session.
Effective date: Not listed

Plain English Breakdown

The candidate explanation included speculative claims about the bill's implementation and enforcement, which are not supported by the official source material.

Rules to Speed Up Review of Certain Housing Projects

This bill creates a process to speed up the review of housing projects near public transportation that have little risk of affecting historic sites.

What This Bill Does

Creates a faster way for certain housing projects near public transit to be reviewed if they are unlikely to affect historically significant resources.
Authorizes lead agencies, including county governments, to make determinations on the potential effects of a project.
Sets a time limit of up to ninety days for the state department to agree or disagree with project decisions made by counties.
Exempts projects from further review if there is no change in plans, unless new historic properties, aviation artifacts, or burial sites are found later.

Who It Names or Affects

County governments and agencies involved in housing development near public transportation.
Developers of residential transit-oriented developments that meet the criteria set by this bill.

Terms To Know

Historic Preservation: The process of protecting and maintaining places, buildings, or objects that are important to a community's history.
Transit-oriented Development (TOD): A type of urban planning where housing is built near public transportation to make it easier for people to live without cars.

Limits and Unknowns

The bill does not specify what happens if the state department fails to respond within ninety days.
It is unclear how this process will be implemented and enforced in practice.
The effective date of July 1, 3000 suggests that this may be a placeholder for an actual future date.

Amendments

These notes stay tied to the official amendment files and metadata from the legislature.

HD1

Hawaii published version HD1

Plain English: The amendment changes how projects that might affect historical sites are reviewed, making it faster for certain types of housing developments in transit-oriented areas.

Creates a process to speed up the review of mixed-use and residential transit-oriented development projects if they have low risk of affecting historically significant resources.
Limits the Department of Land and Natural Resources to ninety days or thirty days (if no historic properties are affected) to respond with concurrence or non-concurrence on project effect determinations.
Exempts projects from further review once written concurrence is given, unless there's a significant change in the project scope.

The amendment text does not specify all details about how phased reviews and programmatic agreements will work for large or complex projects.

HD2

Hawaii published version HD2

Plain English: The amendment creates a process to expedite reviews for certain residential transit-oriented development projects in Hawaii while ensuring protection for historic resources.

Adds a new definition for 'majority-residential mixed-use transit-oriented development' which means a project where more than half of the area is residential.
Modifies existing law to allow lead agencies to make determinations on project effects and sets time limits (90 or 30 days) for the Department of Land and Natural Resources to review these determinations.
Establishes that projects with written concurrence from the department are exempt from further review unless there is a significant change in the project scope.

The amendment text was truncated, so some details about how private landowners interact with historic properties were not included.

Bill History

2025-12-08 D
Carried over to 2026 Regular Session.
2025-02-13 H
Report adopted; referred to the committee(s) on JHA as amended in HD 2 with none voting aye with reservations; Representative(s) Pierick voting no (1) and Representative(s) Cochran, Kitagawa, Ward excused (3).
2025-02-13 H
Reported from WAL (Stand. Com. Rep. No. 600) as amended in HD 2, recommending referral to JHA.
2025-02-11 H
The committee on WAL recommend that the measure be PASSED, WITH AMENDMENTS. The votes were as follows: 10 Ayes: Representative(s) Hashem, Lamosao, Belatti, Ichiyama, Morikawa, Poepoe, Woodson, Shimizu, Souza; Ayes with reservations: Representative(s) Iwamoto; 0 Noes: none; and 0 Excused: none.
2025-02-07 H
Bill scheduled to be heard by WAL on Tuesday, 02-11-25 10:00AM in House conference room 411 VIA VIDEOCONFERENCE.
2025-02-06 H
Passed Second Reading as amended in HD 1 and referred to the committee(s) on WAL with none voting aye with reservations; Representative(s) Muraoka, Pierick voting no (2) and Representative(s) Ward excused (1).
2025-02-06 H
Reported from HSG (Stand. Com. Rep. No. 239) as amended in HD 1, recommending passage on Second Reading and referral to WAL.
2025-01-31 H
The committee on HSG recommend that the measure be PASSED, WITH AMENDMENTS. The votes were as follows: 5 Ayes: Representative(s) Evslin, Miyake, Grandinetti, Kila, La Chica; Ayes with reservations: none; 2 Noes: Representative(s) Muraoka, Pierick; and 2 Excused: Representative(s) Cochran, Kitagawa.
2025-01-28 H
Bill scheduled to be heard by HSG on Friday, 01-31-25 9:15AM in House conference room 430 VIA VIDEOCONFERENCE.
2025-01-27 H
This measure has been deleted from the meeting scheduled on Tuesday 01-28-25 9:00AM in conference room 411 VIA VIDEOCONFERENCE.
2025-01-27 H
Re-referred to HSG, WAL, JHA, referral sheet 4
2025-01-24 H
Bill scheduled to be heard by WAL on Tuesday, 01-28-25 9:00AM in House conference room 411 VIA VIDEOCONFERENCE.
2025-01-21 H
Referred to WAL, HSG, JHA, referral sheet 2
2025-01-21 H
Introduced and Pass First Reading.
2025-01-17 H
Pending introduction.

Official Summary Text

RELATING TO HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
Historic Preservation; County-designated Transit-oriented Development; SHPD Review; Historic Property
Creates a process for expediting the review of majority-residential mixed-use transit-oriented development or residential transit-oriented development on certain parcels within county-designated transit-oriented development zones that have a low risk of affecting historically significant resources. Authorizes lead agencies, including county governments, to make determinations on the potential effects of a project. Creates a ninety-day limit, or thirty-day if no historic property is to be affected, to concur or not concur with project effect determinations. Exempts projects with written concurrence from further review unless there is a change to the project or additional historic properties, aviation artifacts, or burial sites are identified within the project area. Establishes notice and reporting requirements if there is a change to the project or additional historic properties, aviation artifacts, or burial sites are identified within the project area after the initial written concurrence. Effective 7/1/3000. (HD2)

Current Bill Text

Read the full stored bill text

HB738

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

H.B. NO.

738

THIRTY-THIRD LEGISLATURE, 2025

STATE OF HAWAII

A BILL FOR AN ACT

relating
to historic preservation
.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF HAWAII:

����
SECTION 1.
�

The legislature finds that it is critically important to preserve Hawaii's
cultural resources, including historic properties and burial sites, as integral
elements of the State's heritage.
�
The
legislature also recognizes the pressing need to expedite housing development,
particularly in transit-oriented development areas, to address the housing
crisis and create more housing opportunities in close proximity to transportation.

����
Accordingly, the purpose of this Act is to:

����
(1)
�
Create a process
for expediting the review of residential transit-oriented development on
certain parcels within county-designated transit oriented development zones
that have a low risk of affecting historically significant resources;

����
(2)
�
Further empower
lead agencies, including county governments, to make determinations on the
potential effects of a project;

����
(3)
�
Create a ninety-day
limit to concur or not concur with project effect determinations; and

����
(4)
�
Ensure that
projects with written concurrence are exempt from further review unless there
is a significant change to the project.

����
SECTION
2
.
�
Section 6E-8,
Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by amending subsection (a) to read as
follows:

����
"
(a)
�
Before
any agency or officer of the State or its political subdivisions commences any
project [
which
]
that
may affect historic property,
an
aviation
artifact, or a burial site, the
lead
agency [
or officer
] shall [
advise
the department
]
render a determination on the potential effect of the
project
and allow the department an opportunity for review of the effect of
the proposed project on historic properties, aviation artifacts, or burial
sites, consistent with section 6E-43, especially those listed on the Hawaii
register of historic places.
�
The
proposed project shall not be commenced, or if it has already begun, continued,
until the department has [
given its written concurrence.
]
been
afforded the opportunity to review the project in compliance with this
subsection.
�
If:

����
(1)
�
The proposed
project consists of corridors or large land areas;

����
(2)
�
Access to
properties is restricted; or

����
(3)
�
Circumstances
dictate that construction be done in stages,

the department may give its written concurrence
based on a phased review of the project; provided that there shall be a
programmatic agreement between the department and the project applicant that
identifies each phase and the estimated timelines for each phase.

����
The
department shall provide written concurrence or non-concurrence within ninety
days after the filing of a request with the department.
�
[
The
]
If the department fails to
provide written concurrence or non-concurrence with a project effect
determination within ninety days, the project may move to the next step in the
compliance process.

����
The

agency or officer seeking to proceed with the project, or any person, may
appeal the department's concurrence or non-concurrence to the Hawaii historic
places review board.
�
An agency, officer,
or other person who is dissatisfied with the decision of the review board may
apply to the governor, who may take action as the governor deems best in
overruling or sustaining the department.

����
Once
the department has provided written concurrence on the project effect
determination and any necessary mitigation measures have been identified and
agreed upon for a proposed project, the appropriate agency or officer of the
State or any of its political subdivisions may commence the project, and the
project shall be exempt from further review by the department unless there is a
significant change to the project's scope of work or project area or unless
additional historic properties, aviation artifacts, or burial sites are
identified within the project area.
"

����
SECTION
3
.
�
Section 6E-10,
Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by amending subsection (a) to read as
follows:

����
"
(a)
�
Before any
construction, alteration, disposition or improvement of any nature, by, for, or
permitted by a private landowner may be commenced [
which
]
that

will affect an historic property on the Hawaii register of historic places, the
landowner shall notify the department of the construction, alteration,
disposition, or improvement of any nature and allow the department opportunity
for review of the effect of the proposed construction, alteration, disposition,
or improvement of any nature on the historic property.
�
The proposed construction, alteration,
disposition, or improvement of any nature shall not be commenced, or in the
event it has already begun, continue, until the department shall have given its
concurrence or ninety days have elapsed.
�

Within ninety days after notification, the department shall:

����
(1)
�
Commence
condemnation proceedings for the purchase of the historic property if the
department and property owner do not agree upon an appropriate course of
action;

����
(2)
�
Permit the owner
to proceed with the owner's construction, alteration, or improvement; or

����
(3)
�
In coordination
with the owner, undertake or permit the investigation, recording, preservation,
and salvage of any historical information deemed necessary to preserve Hawaiian
history, by any qualified agency for this purpose.

����
Once the department has provided
written concurrence on the project effect determination and any necessary
mitigation measures have been identified and agreed upon for a proposed
project, the property owner may commence the project, and the project shall be
exempt from further review by the department unless there is a significant
change to the project's scope of work or project area or unless additional
historic properties, aviation artifacts, or burial sites are identified within
the project area.
"

����
SECTION
4
.
�
Section 6E-42,
Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended to read as follows:

����
"
�6E-42
�
Review of proposed projects.
�

(
a)
�
Except as provided in section 6E-42.2, before

any agency or officer of the State or its political subdivisions
approves any project involving a permit, license, certificate, land use change,
subdivision, or other entitlement for use, which may affect historic property,
aviation artifacts, or a burial site, the agency or office shall advise the
department and prior to any approval allow the department an opportunity for
review and comment on the effect of the proposed project on historic
properties, aviation artifacts, or burial sites, consistent with section 6E-43,
including those listed in the Hawaii register of historic places.
�
If:

����
(1)
�
The proposed
project consists of corridors or large land areas;

����
(2)
�
Access to
properties is restricted; or

����
(3)
�
Circumstances
dictate that construction be done in stages,

the department's review and comment may be based on
a phased review of the project; provided that there shall be a programmatic
agreement between the department and the project applicant that identifies each
phase and the estimated timelines for each phase.

����
Once the department has provided
written concurrence on the project effect determination and any necessary
mitigation measures have been identified and agreed upon for a proposed
project, the appropriate agency or officer of the State or any of its political
subdivisions may commence the project, and the project shall be exempt from
further review by the department unless there is a significant change to the
project's scope of work or project area or unless additional historic
properties, aviation artifacts, or burial sites are identified within the
project area.

����
(b)
�

The department shall inform the public of any project proposals
submitted to it under this section that are not otherwise subject to the
requirement of a public hearing or other public notification.

����
(c)
�

Counties deriving and expending revenues on mass transit stations
pursuant to section 46-16.8 may request programmatic review by the department
for residential transit-oriented development where a permit, license,
certificate, land use change, subdivision, or other entitlement may be
required.

����
(d)
�

No later than January 1, 2026, the counties shall work with the
department to identify and provide to the department specific parcels in
proximity to mass transit stations where residential transit-oriented
development is specifically consistent with a comprehensive general plan
adopted pursuant to section 46-4; provided that:

����
(1)
�
The counties shall
first consult with the department and agree through memorandum on the mass
transit stations, and specific transit-oriented development parcels, scoping
the potential area for initiating programmatic review; and

����
(2)
�
The counties shall
then solicit requests and consent from non-county landowners to have their
parcels within the scoped area of the memorandum initiating programmatic review
to proceed with the programmatic review process.

����
(e)
�

The department shall review all parcels submitted by the counties
pursuant to the scoping memorandum and classify each parcel, within six months
of submittal, according to the risk that residential transit-oriented
development may pose to historic properties into three categories in order of
potential effect level from high to low in the categories of architecture,
archaeology, and history and culture; provided that:

����
(1)
�
All county and
non-county parcels for programmatic review shall include the county's
assessment of whether development on each parcel may affect historic property,
aviation artifacts, or a burial site; and

����
(2)
�
This assessment
is based on:

���������
(A)
�
The
Hawaii or national register of historic places;

���������
(B)
�
The
age of above-surface structures;

���������
(C)
�
Any
existing archaeological inventory surveys previously accepted by the
department;

���������
(D)
�
Any
burial treatment plans accepted by the department;

���������
(E)
�
The
type of substrate known to typically contain burials; and

���������
(F)
�
Any
other literary review relevant to the area.

����
(f)
�

The department shall work with the county that made the submittal to
develop and agree on permitting memoranda within three months of classification
regarding development best practices, including continued identification,
addressing levels of risk for the lower two effect levels in each of the
categories, including but not limited to creating photo inventories and the
presence of onsite archaeological monitoring, and consider these best practices
as standardized for activities conducted under this section.

����
A county shall incorporate by reference
these best practices as conditions of approval for any project involving a
permit, license, certificate, land use change, subdivision, or other
entitlement for use.

����
(g)
�

Parcels identified by the department where all categories are rated in the
lower two effect levels shall be considered to comply with subsection (a) or
section 6E-8 regarding state or county lands or projects, and any subsequent
permit, license, certificate, land use change, subdivision, or other
entitlement for use shall not require referral to the department; provided that:

����
(1)
�
The project is
only residential transit-oriented;

����
(2)
�
The project has
reached substantial construction by June 30, 2036; and

����
(3)
�
Development
activities have commenced consistent with best practices to address the applicable
level of risk.

����
(h)
�

Any parcels characterized as highest risk shall require referral to the
department pursuant to subsection (a).

����
(i)
�

Section 6E-43.6 shall apply in the event of an inadvertent discovery of a
burial site.

����
(j)
�

The Hawaii housing finance and development corporation may submit to the
department any additional parcels for programmatic review if the counties do not
provide a submittal pursuant to subsection (d); provided that the same analysis
shall be conducted pursuant to subsection (e), and the department shall
classify the submittal within six months of receipt.

����
(k)
�

The Hawaii community development authority may submit parcels within its
jurisdiction to the department for review, and any parcels identified by the
department for which all categories are rated in the lower two effect levels shall
be considered to comply with subsection (a) or section 6E-8 regarding state or
county lands or projects, and any subsequent permit, license, certificate, land
use change, subdivision, or other entitlement for use shall not require
referral to the department; provided that:

����
(1)
�
The project is
only residential transit-oriented;

����
(2)
�
The project has
reached substantial construction by June 30, 2036;

����
(3)
�
Development
activities have commenced consistent with best practices to address the
applicable level of risk; and

����
(4)
�
The department
shall classify the submittal within six months of receipt.

����
[
(c)
]
(l)
�
The department shall adopt rules in
accordance with chapter 91 to implement this section.
"

����
SECTION 5.
�
This Act does not affect rights and duties
that matured, penalties that were incurred, and proceedings that were begun
before its effective date.

����
SECTION 6.
�
Statutory material to be repealed is
bracketed and stricken.
�
New statutory
material is underscored.

����
SECTION 7.
�
This Act shall take effect on July 1, 2025.

INTRODUCED BY:

_____________________________

Report Title:

Historic
Preservation; County-designated Transit-oriented Development; SHPD Review;
Historic Property

Description:

Creates a
process for expediting the review of residential transit-oriented development
on certain parcels within county-designated transit oriented development zones
that have a low risk of affecting historically significant resources.
�
Authorizes lead agencies, including county
governments, to make determinations on the potential effects of a project.
�
Creates a ninety-day limit to concur or not
concur with project effect determinations.
�

Provides that projects with written concurrence are exempt from further
review unless there is a significant change to the project
or additional
historic properties, aviation artifacts, or burial sites are identified within
the project area.

The summary description
of legislation appearing on this page is for informational purposes only and is
not legislation or evidence of legislative intent.