12-2-2021 Opinion of the Supreme Court

Home

*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAII REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER *** only the LPC had jurisdiction over the application, and that the LPC could "dispose" of the application only after holding a public hearing. Hualalai requested that the matter be placed on the LPC' s agenda for an immediate public hearing. The LPC did not take any further action. B. Appeal to the Supreme Court As discussed above, Bolton submitted Special Permit Application No . SPP-16-188 pursuant to HRS § 205-6 to resolve the potential Zoning Code violations identified by the Planning Director, i .e . , operating a quarry, and maintaining a construction base yard and a junk yard. After the Planning Director withdrew Special Permit Application No . SPP-16-188, Hualalai filed a direct appeal to this court, challenging the LPC' s failure to issue a decision on its petition to intervene and objecting to the Planning Director' s withdrawal decision and the LPC' s decision to treat the proceeding as a closed matter. Hualalai presents five points of error to this court : (1) "The Appellee [LPC] erred when it failed to rule on the Appellant' s Petition to Intervene in the Contested Case"; (2) "The Appellee [LPC] erred when it failed to render a decision on [Special Permit Application No . SPP-16-188] itself"; (3) "The Appellee Planning Director erred in exercising the Appellee [LPC] ' s adjudicatory powers when he `withdrew' the Application"; (4) "The Appellee [LPC] erred when it allowed the 18