2005-01-21 TLAURANCE - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

TORIGOE:Yes, if you want to ask, ask me for legal advice with respect to what some of the options are under the rules you can do that. You may want to wait until the applicant has completed his case or, or not, you know, but its up to you. SPRINGER:I think that the answer that you may give me with regard to some of the definitions that were working under would be helpful to hear the rest of the testimony. VITOUSEK:Madam Chair. May I make one point before, if theres going to be a motion. I do recall, this relates to, I hope relates to the issue. But, I do recall Mr. Takemoto saying that his interpretation of the rule was that land means the whole property; and so what I wanted to point out at the start of the executive session is that under Section A.3 there is a definition of the term lot, which refers to, means a parcel or track of land in established subdivision. And so, I just wanted to point out that theres a- that there is a definition of the term lot and that that term is not used in the standard for hardship. In other words, it says land not lot. And,ifithadmeantthewholeparcelitwouldvesaidlotbecauseitdefinedit.SoIjustwanted to raise that before the Executive Session, I mean, if thats going to be the issue considered. SPRINGER:Thank you, Mr. Vitousek. VITOUSEK:Im sorry, may I raise another point along the same line, that you might want to discuss with counsel. I just want to make this take to go quicker. I also note in Section 8-3 that theres no definition of hardship. And I dont see a definition of hardship as distinguished from- as distinguished from a reasonable use of land anywhere in Rule 8. And so Id ask that you also consider HRS 205A-46(b) which says, and as youre aware HO 205A is the Coastal Zone Management Act which creates the shoreline setbacks and which delegates responsibility to this commission. And its a direct allegation. In other words it isnt to the County and then to the Commission, its a direct allegation to the Commission as the authority. But that section states, Hardship shall be defined in rules adopted by the authority under chapter 91. And thats a fairly unequivocal statement that the Commission is required to adopt rules defining hardship in order to deny someone a variance based on a hardship. And so, I just- you know, rather than bring this out in testimony later on before the executive session I thought Id raise that now and say that, you know, its our position that- if there is a definition of hardship in the Planning Commission rules, it is those 3 criteria set out in 8-10(3)(A)(i), (ii), (iii). Im not sure thats the definition cause when I read the Planning Directors recommendation he talks about hardship like it was something other than just a reasonable use of land. And so, you know, if hes applying some standard other than just what a reasonable use of land is, then hes applying a standard that exists in his head maybe and doesnt exist in a rule created by Chapter 91 and published. So thats our position, just give you a preview, thats where youre going in Executive Session. Thank you. SPRINGER:Thank you, Mr. Vitousek. ROTHSTEIN:May I respond to what hes saying? SPRINGER:Im sorry, Mr. Rothstein, were going into our deliberation on this matter before us now. Commissioners, Mr. Vitousek did touch upon some of my concerns. I am 15