Hawaii House Bill HCR79

Hawaii 2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/12/26
• Refer: 3/18/26
• Report Pass: 4/2/26
• Refer: 4/2/26

Caption

Requesting The Planning Or Planning And Permitting Department Of Each County To Establish Kupuna-friendly Building Permit Requirements For Parking Accessibility And Private Businesses Operating Hours.

Summary

HCR79 is a House Concurrent Resolution that asks the planning or planning and permitting department in each Hawaii county to develop kupuna-friendly building permit requirements. The resolution focuses on two broad areas: requiring private businesses and malls to provide special hours for kupuna to enter, and increasing the minimum number of parking spaces set aside for kupuna, including both non-disabled and disabled kupuna. The measure is framed as a response to the needs of Hawaii’s aging population and the access barriers older adults and people with mobility disabilities face in everyday community life. The resolution’s findings emphasize that parking access is a safety and participation issue, noting that insufficient accessible parking can increase the risk of falls and injuries and can effectively exclude kupuna with mobility disabilities from commerce, services, and civic participation. It also points to the COVID-19 era practice of special shopping hours for kupuna as evidence that designated hours can improve access to goods and services. The resolution is directed to county planning authorities and local elected officials, reflecting an intent to influence local permitting practices rather than create a statewide regulatory mandate.

Impact

HCR79 does not amend the Hawaii Revised Statutes or create enforceable statewide requirements. Instead, it is a nonbinding request that county planning and permitting departments establish permit-related standards that would affect how private businesses and malls are approved or conditioned at the county level. If adopted by counties, the requested changes could influence parking design, accessibility requirements, and operating-hour accommodations for businesses, but any actual legal effect would depend on county action and implementation through local permitting processes.

Sentiment

The overall sentiment of the resolution is supportive and protective of kupuna, with a strong accessibility and public-welfare framing. The bill text presents the proposal as a practical response to barriers faced by older adults and people with disabilities, and it relies on public-health and community-access arguments rather than controversy or fiscal concerns. No committee testimony, votes, or recorded opposition were provided, so the available record suggests a generally favorable posture toward the measure, at least in its introduced form.

Contention

The main potential points of contention are the scope and feasibility of the requested county requirements. Requiring private businesses and malls to provide special hours for kupuna could raise questions about operational burden, enforcement, and whether such rules should be imposed through building permits. Increasing the minimum number of parking spaces for kupuna may also prompt debate over land-use standards, parking supply, and how to distinguish between disabled and non-disabled kupuna in practice. Because the resolution is directed to county agencies, any disagreement would likely center on local regulatory authority and implementation rather than on the resolution’s underlying goal of improving access.