NZHPT national communications manager Shelley Fry said the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Bill, which is before the local government and environment select committee, was not intended to make life more complicated.
This is despite concerns aired at a meeting of the Waitaki council on Tuesday by Oamaru resource management lawyer George Berry that the Bill could mean the introduction of steep archaeological survey fees, even to change something as minor as the wallpaper of a pre-1900 building.
Ms Fry said if the Bill became law it would reduce maximum statutory time frames from six months to just 20 working days for routine" applications and those with "minor effects".
She said it would also bring about a "streamlined" and unitary application process for archaeological consents.
"The Bill's current proposals actually aim to streamline and simplify the archaeological authority provisions, including reducing the amount of information applicants may have to provide with some applications, and reducing maximum timeframes the NZHPT has for processing archaeological authority applications.
"It is not the intent of the Bill to make the authority provisions apply to maintenance of and alterations to pre-1900 buildings.
"There is certainly no intention of an archaeological authority being required for painting or replacing wallpaper."
The Bill would not widen the provisions of the existing 1993 Act and the amount of information applicants would be required to provide for minor alterations would, in fact, be reduced under the new Bill, she said.
Earlier this week, the council joined the Oamaru Whitestone Civic Trust, which owns 17 heritage buildings in North Otago, in making a submission pointing out they felt the Bill would impact financially on heritage building owners by requiring archaeological approval to alter or modify buildings.
Mr Berry pointed out his comments on Tuesday had been made in reference to a public submission made by the New Zealand Law Society, which stated there were "potential practical difficulties" surrounding certain definitions contained in the wording of the Bill.
He said he would still be making submissions on behalf of the council and the Oamaru Whitestone Civic Trust.
There were still "several issues" that needed to be looked at carefully, he said.
