TO: Rep. Mele Carroll, Chair
Rep. Maile S. L. Shimabukuro, Vice Chair
Committee on Hawaiian Affairs
Rep. Ken Ito, Chair
Rep. Sharon E. Har, Vice Chair
Committee on Water, Land and Ocean Resources
FROM: Kiersten Faulkner, Executive Director
Historic Hawaii Foundation
RE: HCR336/HR254 : Requesting SHPD to complete a Statewide Survey and Inventory to Identify and Document Historic Properties, Artifacts and Burial Sites
On behalf of Historic Hawai‘i Foundation (HHF), I am writing in support of HCR336/HR254, which requests that the State Historic Preservation Division complete a statewide survey and inventory to identify and document historic properties, artifacts, burial goods and sites, and human skeletal remains that are held by or under the control of the State.
HHF strongly supports all efforts to identify and protect significant historic properties. Updating the state’s inventory of historic sites, structures, artifacts, burials and other historic properties is necessary in order to improve the process of identifying and disclosing the presence of potentially significant historic and cultural sites in a timely way, which in turn will better allow the planning and development processes to provide for their protection, and will further provide for consumer protection by ensuring that property owners are informed about historic preservation responsibilities and restrictions. The discovery, documentation, evaluation and preservation of significant historic properties is in the best interest of all stakeholders, including property owners, developers, and the greater community.
The state historic preservation division (SHPD) has a mandate to conduct historic surveys and inventories; the county governments should also be including that level of analysis in their general plans and community development plans. The basic step of completing the identification of properties that meet the criteria of eligibility for historic designation would allow for up-front analysis and protection, rather than simply reacting to proposals in an ad hoc manner.
Therefore, HHF recommends approval of HCR336/HR254.
Showing posts with label 2010 Legislative Session. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2010 Legislative Session. Show all posts
Monday, March 22, 2010
Historic Hawaii Foundation's Testimony on SRC160: Relating to the replacement of the Hawaii State Capitol's reflecting ponds
SUBMITTED VIA WEB: www.capitol.hawaii.gov/emailtestimony
To: Sen. Clayton Hee, Chair
Sen. Jill N. Tokuda, Vice Chair
Committee on Water, Land, Agriculture and Hawaiian Affairs
From: Kiersten Faulkner
Executive Director, Historic Hawai‘i Foundation
Committee Date: Monday, March 22 2010
3:15 p.m. Conference Room 229
Subject: SCR160, Requesting Replacement of the State Capitol’s Reflecting Ponds
On behalf of Historic Hawai‘i Foundation (HHF), I am writing in opposition to SCR 160, which requests the Department of Land and Natural Resources to approve and the Department of Accounting and General Services to plan and implement a proposal to replace the reflecting ponds surrounding the State Capitol with a garden of native plants.
The Hawai‘i State Capitol is designated on both the State and National Registers of Historic Places. Its architectural significance derives in part from the symbolism of the building features, which reflects the cultural, social and natural histories of Hawai‘i. As the only island state in the nation, Hawaii’s geography is unique. The design of the State Capitol reflects that geography: the reflecting ponds stand for the Pacific Ocean; the two chambers show the strength of the volcanic origins of the islands; the columns symbolize palm trees; and the rotunda is open to the sky.
Any proposal to rehabilitate or restore the structure should first begin with an understanding of the character-defining features that contribute to its historic significance, which certainly includes the reflecting pools. Recommendations to repair, maintain or retrofit the building need to take care to avoid adverse effects on those features. The role of the State Historic Preservation Division is to ensure that the proper care is taken during planning and design, as well as implementation of the approved plan. SHPD’s review of projects in based on preservation standards adopted by the Secretary of the Interior. The standards for rehabilitation and preservation of historic sites provide protection for the historic resources and should not be discarded lightly.
HHF recommends that the resolution be changed to direct SHPD and DAGS to develop a plan for the appropriate repair and maintenance of the waterproof membrane and control of algae. This would address the legislature’s concern for the maintenance and costs, protect the historic integrity of the Capitol, and support the professional standards used by the preservation division.
To: Sen. Clayton Hee, Chair
Sen. Jill N. Tokuda, Vice Chair
Committee on Water, Land, Agriculture and Hawaiian Affairs
From: Kiersten Faulkner
Executive Director, Historic Hawai‘i Foundation
Committee Date: Monday, March 22 2010
3:15 p.m. Conference Room 229
Subject: SCR160, Requesting Replacement of the State Capitol’s Reflecting Ponds
On behalf of Historic Hawai‘i Foundation (HHF), I am writing in opposition to SCR 160, which requests the Department of Land and Natural Resources to approve and the Department of Accounting and General Services to plan and implement a proposal to replace the reflecting ponds surrounding the State Capitol with a garden of native plants.
The Hawai‘i State Capitol is designated on both the State and National Registers of Historic Places. Its architectural significance derives in part from the symbolism of the building features, which reflects the cultural, social and natural histories of Hawai‘i. As the only island state in the nation, Hawaii’s geography is unique. The design of the State Capitol reflects that geography: the reflecting ponds stand for the Pacific Ocean; the two chambers show the strength of the volcanic origins of the islands; the columns symbolize palm trees; and the rotunda is open to the sky.
Any proposal to rehabilitate or restore the structure should first begin with an understanding of the character-defining features that contribute to its historic significance, which certainly includes the reflecting pools. Recommendations to repair, maintain or retrofit the building need to take care to avoid adverse effects on those features. The role of the State Historic Preservation Division is to ensure that the proper care is taken during planning and design, as well as implementation of the approved plan. SHPD’s review of projects in based on preservation standards adopted by the Secretary of the Interior. The standards for rehabilitation and preservation of historic sites provide protection for the historic resources and should not be discarded lightly.
HHF recommends that the resolution be changed to direct SHPD and DAGS to develop a plan for the appropriate repair and maintenance of the waterproof membrane and control of algae. This would address the legislature’s concern for the maintenance and costs, protect the historic integrity of the Capitol, and support the professional standards used by the preservation division.
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Historic Hawaii Foundation's Testimony on HB2484
To: Rep. Mele Carroll, Chair
Rep. Maile S.L. Shimabukuro, Vice Chair, Committee on Hawaiian Affairs
Rep. Ken Ito, Chair
Rep. Sharon E. Har, Vice Chair
Committee on Water, Land & Ocean Resources
From: Kiersten Faulkner
Executive Director, Historic Hawai‘i Foundation
Committee Date: Wednesday, February 3, 2010
9:00 am
Conference Room 329
Subject: HB2484, Relating to Historic Preservation
On behalf of Historic Hawai‘i Foundation (HHF), I am writing in support of the intent of HB2484, which provides civil penalties for the knowing destruction of heiau located on private lands, except as permitted by the department of land and natural resources.
HHF strongly supports all efforts to identify and protect significant historic properties, including civil and administrative penalties for the destruction of sites significant to the history and prehistory of Native Hawaiians.
The intent of HB2484 is to provide protection of sacred and traditional cultural sites on private lands, but there is some ambiguity that could lead to later conflicts. HHF recommends that definitions of heiau be added to the measure, as well as guidance for reconciling differences of professional and/or cultural judgment in the event that there is disagreement about the use, archaeological features or historic integrity of the subject site. We also recommend that the measure not be limited to private property, but to apply equally to lands owned or controlled by the State or any of its political subdivisions.
Rep. Maile S.L. Shimabukuro, Vice Chair, Committee on Hawaiian Affairs
Rep. Ken Ito, Chair
Rep. Sharon E. Har, Vice Chair
Committee on Water, Land & Ocean Resources
From: Kiersten Faulkner
Executive Director, Historic Hawai‘i Foundation
Committee Date: Wednesday, February 3, 2010
9:00 am
Conference Room 329
Subject: HB2484, Relating to Historic Preservation
On behalf of Historic Hawai‘i Foundation (HHF), I am writing in support of the intent of HB2484, which provides civil penalties for the knowing destruction of heiau located on private lands, except as permitted by the department of land and natural resources.
HHF strongly supports all efforts to identify and protect significant historic properties, including civil and administrative penalties for the destruction of sites significant to the history and prehistory of Native Hawaiians.
The intent of HB2484 is to provide protection of sacred and traditional cultural sites on private lands, but there is some ambiguity that could lead to later conflicts. HHF recommends that definitions of heiau be added to the measure, as well as guidance for reconciling differences of professional and/or cultural judgment in the event that there is disagreement about the use, archaeological features or historic integrity of the subject site. We also recommend that the measure not be limited to private property, but to apply equally to lands owned or controlled by the State or any of its political subdivisions.
Historic Hawaii Foundation's Testimony on HB2480
VIA EMAIL:
To: Rep. Mele Carroll, Chair
Rep. Maile S.L. Shimabukuro, Vice Chair, Committee on Hawaiian Affairs
Rep. Ken Ito, Chair
Rep. Sharon E. Har, Vice Chair
Committee on Water, Land & Ocean Resources
From: Kiersten Faulkner
Executive Director, Historic Hawai‘i Foundation
Committee Date: Wednesday, February 3, 2010
9:00 am
Conference Room 329
Subject: HB2480, Relating to Historic Places
On behalf of Historic Hawai‘i Foundation (HHF), I am writing in support of HB2480, which requires the state historic preservation division to report on the historical significance of an archaeological site or feature if it is destroyed, and provides civil penalties for destruction of archaeological sites that are listed on the state or national registers of historic places.
Since 1974, Historic Hawaii Foundation has been a statewide leader for historic preservation. HHF works to preserve Hawaii’s unique architectural and cultural heritage and believes that historic preservation is an important element in the present and future quality of life, economic viability and environmental sustainability of the state.
HHF strongly supports all efforts to identify and protect significant historic properties, including civil and administrative penalties for the destruction of sites significant to the history and prehistory of Native Hawaiians that are designated on the state and national registers of historic places.
While the intent of HB2480 is to provide protection of archaeological sites and features only, HHF would also encourage the same level of protection for other sites that are designated on the historic registers. To that end, we recommend that the legislature direct the department of land and natural resources to convene a review of best practices and models for good preservation systems that can be implemented comprehensively, with recommendations to be submitted to the legislature next year.
Therefore, HHF recommends that HB2480 be approved.
To: Rep. Mele Carroll, Chair
Rep. Maile S.L. Shimabukuro, Vice Chair, Committee on Hawaiian Affairs
Rep. Ken Ito, Chair
Rep. Sharon E. Har, Vice Chair
Committee on Water, Land & Ocean Resources
From: Kiersten Faulkner
Executive Director, Historic Hawai‘i Foundation
Committee Date: Wednesday, February 3, 2010
9:00 am
Conference Room 329
Subject: HB2480, Relating to Historic Places
On behalf of Historic Hawai‘i Foundation (HHF), I am writing in support of HB2480, which requires the state historic preservation division to report on the historical significance of an archaeological site or feature if it is destroyed, and provides civil penalties for destruction of archaeological sites that are listed on the state or national registers of historic places.
Since 1974, Historic Hawaii Foundation has been a statewide leader for historic preservation. HHF works to preserve Hawaii’s unique architectural and cultural heritage and believes that historic preservation is an important element in the present and future quality of life, economic viability and environmental sustainability of the state.
HHF strongly supports all efforts to identify and protect significant historic properties, including civil and administrative penalties for the destruction of sites significant to the history and prehistory of Native Hawaiians that are designated on the state and national registers of historic places.
While the intent of HB2480 is to provide protection of archaeological sites and features only, HHF would also encourage the same level of protection for other sites that are designated on the historic registers. To that end, we recommend that the legislature direct the department of land and natural resources to convene a review of best practices and models for good preservation systems that can be implemented comprehensively, with recommendations to be submitted to the legislature next year.
Therefore, HHF recommends that HB2480 be approved.
HHF testimony on HB2825
From: Kiersten Faulkner
Executive Director, Historic Hawai‘i Foundation
Committee Date: Friday, February 5, 2010
11:00 am
Conference Room 325
Subject: HB2825, Relating to Building Permits
On behalf of Historic Hawai‘i Foundation (HHF), I am writing in opposition to HB2825, which exempts from the county building permit requirement construction of nonresidential agricultural and aquacultural structures on state lands and large privately-owned land parcels leased for agricultural or aquacultural operations.
Land parcels that are likely to be affected by HB 2825 are also likely to contain archaeological, cultural or other historic sites associated with one of the major eras in Hawai‘i’s history, either pre-contact Native Hawaiian or more recent plantation-era development. The investigation and research that results in identification and inventory of historic sites is often triggered by a development proposal, frequently tied to the application for a permit. While some of these historic sites would be identified at an earlier stage than building permit application, and consequently have appropriate protective measures, many of the sites could be unmarked or unprotected up until the time of permitting.
Because building permits are integrally aligned with the State’s historic preservation processes, exempting new development from the permitting procedures would have the additional consequence of eliminating historic preservation reviews. It would be unfortunate if, in the pursuit of support for agriculture, a new law had the unintended consequence of destroying portions of the state’s historic and cultural resources.
Therefore, Historic Hawai‘i Foundation opposes HB2825.
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Proposed Bill (HB1965) Leaves Many Unanswered Questions
In its testimony submitted Jan 26, 2010, Historic Hawaii Foundation (HHF) supports the intent of House Bill HB1965, which would require an archaeology inventory survey prior to the sale of undeveloped land. However, with so many unanswered questions, HHF recommends deferring the bill and directing the Hawaii State Division of Land and Natural Resources to review best practices and make recommendations for implementation next year.
_____________________________________________________________
To: Rep. Angus L.K. McKelvey, Chair
Rep. Isaac W. Choy, Vice Chair
Committee on Economic Revitalization, Business & Military Affairs
From: Kiersten Faulkner
Executive Director, Historic Hawai‘i Foundation
Committee Date: Tuesday, January 26, 2010
8:30 am
Conference Room 312
Subject: HB1965, Relating to Preservation
On behalf of Historic Hawai‘i Foundation (HHF), I am writing with comments about HB1965, which requires an archaeology inventory survey prior to the sale or offer of sale or long-term lease of any undeveloped property in the state.
Since 1974, Historic Hawai‘i Foundation has been a statewide leader for historic preservation. HHF’s 850 members and numerous additional supporters work to preserve Hawai‘i’s unique architectural and cultural heritage and believe that historic preservation is an important element in the present and future quality of life, economic viability and environmental sustainability of the state.
Historic Hawai‘i Foundation supports the intent of the bill, which appears to be an attempt to improve the process to identify and disclose the presence of potentially significant historic and cultural sites in a timely way, in order to allow the planning and development process to provide for their protection, and to provide for consumer protection by ensuring that property owners are informed about historic preservation responsibilities and restrictions. A process that provides for the discovery, documentation, evaluation and preservation of significant historic properties is in the best interest of all stakeholders, including property owners, developers, and the greater community. Providing for better knowledge of potential sites early in the planning process would help eliminate conflicts and misunderstandings prior to significant investment of time and money.
However, it is unclear how the new requirement to conduct an archaeology inventory survey at the time of sale or lease would be integrated with other planning and permitting functions of the state and county governments. The state historic preservation division (SHPD) already has a mandate to conduct historic surveys and inventories; the county governments should also be including that level of analysis in their general plans and community development plans. Both SHPD and county permitting departments are supposed to require and review archaeology inventory surveys (AIS) prior to issuing grubbing and grading permits. The bill appears either to add another level of analysis and review, or to shift the responsibility to the time of sale rather than the time of planning and/or development.
HHF strongly supports all efforts to identify and protect significant historic properties, and to have full disclosure of the rights and responsibilities that come with ownership and management of historic properties. However, the mechanism offered by the bill raises several questions. Will the AIS be repeated each time the property changes hands or will the initial survey be sufficient? Will the AIS be repeated at the time of planning, development and permitting or does it replace that later review? If SHPD’s recommendations for preservation and/or reclassification are not implemented, what is the remedy? How will these recommendations be integrated with other community plans and land use codes? How will the information be made available? How will the measure be enforced and which agency will carry out enforcement?
HHF is also concerned that the state historic preservation division would be charged with another mandate without commensurate staffing and financial support, and that the new mandate would be layered onto existing duties without being fully aligned or integrated with them. We believe that a comprehensive review of the state’s historic preservation program, including the management and regulatory structure, is necessary. Rather than address these issues ad hoc, we would like to see a thoughtful and deliberate approach that includes recommendations for planning, regulations, incentives, education, integration with federal and county processes, and use of best practices in the preservation industry.
Therefore, HHF recommends that HB1965 be deferred, and that the legislature direct the department of land and natural resources to convene a review of best practices and models for good preservation systems that can be implemented comprehensively, with recommendations to be submitted to the legislature next year.
_____________________________________________________________
To: Rep. Angus L.K. McKelvey, Chair
Rep. Isaac W. Choy, Vice Chair
Committee on Economic Revitalization, Business & Military Affairs
From: Kiersten Faulkner
Executive Director, Historic Hawai‘i Foundation
Committee Date: Tuesday, January 26, 2010
8:30 am
Conference Room 312
Subject: HB1965, Relating to Preservation
On behalf of Historic Hawai‘i Foundation (HHF), I am writing with comments about HB1965, which requires an archaeology inventory survey prior to the sale or offer of sale or long-term lease of any undeveloped property in the state.
Since 1974, Historic Hawai‘i Foundation has been a statewide leader for historic preservation. HHF’s 850 members and numerous additional supporters work to preserve Hawai‘i’s unique architectural and cultural heritage and believe that historic preservation is an important element in the present and future quality of life, economic viability and environmental sustainability of the state.
Historic Hawai‘i Foundation supports the intent of the bill, which appears to be an attempt to improve the process to identify and disclose the presence of potentially significant historic and cultural sites in a timely way, in order to allow the planning and development process to provide for their protection, and to provide for consumer protection by ensuring that property owners are informed about historic preservation responsibilities and restrictions. A process that provides for the discovery, documentation, evaluation and preservation of significant historic properties is in the best interest of all stakeholders, including property owners, developers, and the greater community. Providing for better knowledge of potential sites early in the planning process would help eliminate conflicts and misunderstandings prior to significant investment of time and money.
However, it is unclear how the new requirement to conduct an archaeology inventory survey at the time of sale or lease would be integrated with other planning and permitting functions of the state and county governments. The state historic preservation division (SHPD) already has a mandate to conduct historic surveys and inventories; the county governments should also be including that level of analysis in their general plans and community development plans. Both SHPD and county permitting departments are supposed to require and review archaeology inventory surveys (AIS) prior to issuing grubbing and grading permits. The bill appears either to add another level of analysis and review, or to shift the responsibility to the time of sale rather than the time of planning and/or development.
HHF strongly supports all efforts to identify and protect significant historic properties, and to have full disclosure of the rights and responsibilities that come with ownership and management of historic properties. However, the mechanism offered by the bill raises several questions. Will the AIS be repeated each time the property changes hands or will the initial survey be sufficient? Will the AIS be repeated at the time of planning, development and permitting or does it replace that later review? If SHPD’s recommendations for preservation and/or reclassification are not implemented, what is the remedy? How will these recommendations be integrated with other community plans and land use codes? How will the information be made available? How will the measure be enforced and which agency will carry out enforcement?
HHF is also concerned that the state historic preservation division would be charged with another mandate without commensurate staffing and financial support, and that the new mandate would be layered onto existing duties without being fully aligned or integrated with them. We believe that a comprehensive review of the state’s historic preservation program, including the management and regulatory structure, is necessary. Rather than address these issues ad hoc, we would like to see a thoughtful and deliberate approach that includes recommendations for planning, regulations, incentives, education, integration with federal and county processes, and use of best practices in the preservation industry.
Therefore, HHF recommends that HB1965 be deferred, and that the legislature direct the department of land and natural resources to convene a review of best practices and models for good preservation systems that can be implemented comprehensively, with recommendations to be submitted to the legislature next year.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
