A federal panel on Friday voted to advance a revamp of the nation’s historic preservation rules that Trump administration officials say slow down projects.

The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, which is made up primarily of Trump appointees, voted to propose to rewrite requirements to consult with the public if a project may impact historic sites.

Among the projects currently undergoing review under the National Historic Preservation Act is President Trump’s Triumphal Arch. The proposed reforms also come as Trump has repeatedly sought to make changes to other Washington, D.C., landmarks, including the White House and the Kennedy Center.

But, if finalized, the changes to the review process could impact infrastructure projects near historic sites around the country.

Ashley Fry, director of the office of external engagement at the advisory council, said that the draft rule will “move to the interagency review process” with the White House before it is published in the Federal Register.

While Fry did not provide a copy of the draft regulations that the government is considering, the council is widely expected to attempt to speed up projects. 

Travis Voyles, the advisory council’s vice chair who is also a political appointee at the Environmental Protection Agency, said in February that the council plans to “streamline” environmental review and regulatory programs. 

Other Trump officials have also called for changes. 

Kevin Lilly, who has been nominated to oversee fish and wildlife at the Interior Department, lamented last month that the process can cause delays.

“The regulations prescribe a multistep process in which there are multiple opportunities for delay,” he said. “There is no regulatory timeframe for resolving adverse effects and consultation to resolve those effects can be protracted and overly complicated.”

“The regulations are not sufficiently clear that the federal agency is responsible for making all decisions, which can force agencies into endless consultation,” added Lilly, who is not on the panel.

Meanwhile, supporters of the current regulations have expressed concern that the changes will limit the public’s ability to weigh in on projects that could disrupt sites of historic and cultural significance. 

Greg Werkheiser, co-founder of Cultural Heritage Partners, said he expects the regulations to either axe public participation or make it optional for federal agencies. 

“You’ve got to talk about it publicly. You’ve got to see if there’s alternatives. You’ve got to consult experts. You can’t just like hire the pool guy from Mar-a-Lago to put the blue paint down … and the federal government has very detailed standards that you’re supposed to comply with about those processes,” Werkheiser said. 

He added that his organization and others are likely to sue over the proposed changes, saying, “We are fully gearing up for litigation.”