By the time bulldozers started heavy construction at what will be the largest wind farm in Hawaii, the office charged with protecting the state’s historic and cultural resources hadn’t approved the developer’s plan for protecting archaeological resources on the property.

The former Kawailoa plantation land near Haleiwa includes an irrigation system that is more than half a century old and is eligible for inclusion on the state and national registers for historic places.

Today, four months after the heavy grading started, the State Historic Preservation Division still hasn’t completed its review of the First Wind monitoring plan, even though the developer has had monitors in place since the work started and has reported to the agency that no archaeological sites will be disturbed by construction.

"It’s something that slipped through the cracks," William Aila, chairman of the Department of Land and Natural Resources, said of the lack of a timely approval of the monitoring plan. His department oversees SHPD.

Consultants and others who regularly deal with SHPD say that anecdote and dozens of others like it reflect what they say is the embattled agency’s failure to meet two key mandates:

» Provide timely reviews, especially in the archaeology arena, of development-related plans.

» Ensure Hawaii’s historically significant architectural, archaeological and cultural resources are sufficiently protected.

"The office is badly, badly broken, and the impact it’s having is dramatic," said Joseph Kennedy, an archaeological consultant who has been dealing with SHPD on behalf of clients for years.

Kennedy and more than half a dozen other consultants told the Star-Advertiser that their clients at times have waited months for reviews that are supposed to be completed in 30 or 45 days, leading to delayed construction starts and costing money and jobs at a time the state economy can afford neither. In more egregious cases, the waits have topped a year, they added.

Aila, however, said most delayed reviews have not been the agency’s fault but were due to various factors, such as incomplete information from the applicant, legal clarifications needed or changes sought by the applicant to the original plans. He also said all large construction projects generally are being reviewed within the 30- or 45-day windows — unless more information is needed.

Aila similarly defended SHPD’s ability to protect Hawaii’s historic and cultural resources.

"The fact that some projects are delayed is really us being true to our mission," he said. "We’re not going to fast-track something just because somebody wants to fast-track it."

The push to get SHPD to act more quickly on reviews comes as the state searches for ways to expedite construction projects to boost a sluggish building industry and create jobs.

The push also comes as the agency is under pressure from the National Park Service to correct serious operational shortcomings, including inadequate staffing. If SHPD doesn’t make the corrections by early next year, it risks losing its federal certification and millions in federal funding.

Aila acknowledged that the agency has about 400 reviews pending, almost all in the archaeology area and at different stages of the process. Aila said his goal is to whittle that number to zero within two years and has hired a consulting firm to help with the backlog.

Even though the NPS has lauded the agency for making improvements in some areas, it continues to voice concerns about the backlog.

"A delay of months certainly would not be the least bit surprising," said NPS spokesman Mike Litterst, referring to the impact on federal projects needing SHPD reviews.

Several consultants said the delays frustrate developers and often result from inadequate or unmotivated staff or inexperienced workers at an agency that has had chronic turnover problems.

"Here we are trying to jump-start the economy, and our own government is throwing up roadblocks we can’t get around," said Fritz Harris-Glade, a Hawaii island architectural consultant who has a client awaiting an SHPD review needed for a planned $10 million, 75-room hotel in Kailua-Kona.

Aila said the review of the archaeology monitoring plan for that project has been delayed because the applicant changed a burial-site protection plan that now needs to be reapproved by the Hawaii island burial council. Harris-Glade said no such change is being sought.

But until SHPD approves the monitoring plan, originally submitted in March, the developer can’t get a grading permit, which means construction on the Holiday Inn Express can’t begin.

Harris-Glade said the project will create several hundred jobs, including 50 to 100 full-time ones at the hotel.

The permit holdup means final payments to about a dozen firms working on the Holiday Inn development are on hold, adding to the ripple effects of the SHPD backlog, Harris-Glade added.

"We’re not asking for any special favors," he said. "We just want the process to work the way it should."

Under federal regulations, SHPD has 30 days to review reports for federally related projects. The agency has 45 days to complete reviews falling under state regulations. If the agency doesn’t respond within those respective time frames, the presumption is that the plans are OK, and the process can advance.

But most people working on federal projects will wait on the review because of concerns that, without such feedback, something irreplaceable could be destroyed during construction, according to Litterst, the park service spokesman.

Liability concerns also prompt some developers to wait for written approvals, several consultants said.

When NPS staff visited Hawaii in March to check on SHPD’s progress, Army representatives told them that the backlog regarding architectural projects had been cleared, and the Army was happy with the quality of reviews conducted by the architecture branch, which had added staff, Litterst said.

Before the additions, the office had no architect on staff for about a year, which meant a historian was forced to do some architecture reviews.

The city’s Department of Planning and Permitting, which handles about 16,000 building permits annually, said it has not had any major complaints from applicants about the state agency. Proposed construction that affects historic or cultural sites are first reviewed by that office.

"DPP has seen a significant improvement in the way SHPD has streamlined its review procedures," Art Challacombe, the department’s customer service office chief, said in a statement.

The park service’s Litterst, however, noted that SHPD’s archaeology section continues to be understaffed and is where reviews likely are delayed.

Among the corrective measures his agency mandated is the filling of 10 key staff positions, including six archaeologists. The 10 hires would bring SHPD’s staff to about 25.

Litterst said that agency does not have a functional inventory of historic sites that can be easily accessed, which creates problems when staff need to assess the impact of a project on a historic property.

The lack of staffing also has contributed to few Hawaii properties being added to the National Register of Historic Places, which provides certain protections to the properties. SHPD oversees nominations to the register.

Over the past three fiscal years, only three other states have added fewer properties to the list, according to the park service. Overall, Hawaii has the fewest listed properties of any state.

Aila has said he is confident the preservation office will make the needed corrections, maintain its certification and continue to fulfill its mandate of protecting Hawaii’s treasured historic and cultural resources.

But some consultants who regularly deal with the office aren’t so sure, citing anecdotes such as the First Wind one.

Aila acknowledged that SHPD should have approved the monitoring plan for that project once the developer indicated in its archaeological survey that no sites would be adversely affected by construction. He said Friday that the plan would be approved shortly.

Bob Rechtman, the consultant who did the archaeological work, voiced a concern shared by many who deal with that office.

"The concern is that this is just one project among hundreds statewide that has essentially proceeded without timely input from SHPD, raising serious questions about potential cultural resources within other projects that may not be getting protected by the historic preservation review process."