Laserfiche WebLink
which Stafford had requested and was denied.45 While analogizing to Nollan and Dolan, the <br /> court reasoned: <br /> It is enough to say that we can find no meaningful distinction between the <br /> condition imposed on Stafford and the conditions imposed on Dolan and <br /> the Nollans. All were based on general authority taking into account <br /> individual circumstances. Dolan's request for a variance was denied. The <br /> Town was authorized to grant, and did grant, exceptions to the general <br /> requirement that roads abutting subdivisions be improved to specified <br /> standards. Stafford applied for an exception and was refused, but the <br /> Town nevertheless considered whether an exception was appropriate.4~ <br /> Moreover, a number of other jurisdictions, like the United States District Court for the Eastern <br /> District of Virginia, Washington, and Ohio, also apply Dolan to legislative exactions, but have <br /> not explicitly decided the issue.47 <br /> The Hawaii appellate courts have not decided this issue, and indeed, in In re Water Use <br /> <br /> Permlt Applications,48 the Supreme Court of Hawaii declined to address it, stating that "[w]e <br /> <br /> need not address the additional question whether and to what degree Nollan and Dolan extend <br /> <br /> beyond land dedications to include monetary exactions such as those presently at issue."49 <br /> as /d at 624. <br /> td at 641 (footnotes omitted). The ordinances of the County of Hawaii which require affordable <br /> <br /> housing requirements, do not provide for variances from such requirements. Thus, the applicability of the analysis <br /> in Town afFdower Mound v. Stafford Estates Ltd. Partnership, 135 S.W.3d 620, 641 (Tex. 2004) (footnote omitted), <br /> is questionable. <br /> See Nat'l Assn of Home Burlders v. Chesterfield County, 907 F. Supp. 166, 168 (E. D. Va. 1995), afPd, <br /> <br /> 92 F.3d 1180 (4th Cir. 1996); Home Builders Assn v. City ofBeavercreek, 729 N.E.2d 349, 356 (Ohio 2000); <br /> Trimen Dev. Co. v. Krng County, 877 P.2d 187, 194 (Wash. 1994) (en banc). <br /> °8 94 Hawaii 97, 9 P.3d 409 (2000). <br /> av Id at 184 n.102, 9 P.3d at 496 n.102 (citations omitted). <br /> 12 <br /> <br />