Laserfiche WebLink
Case 1:22-cv-00247-DKW-RT Document 85 Filed 12/21/23 Page 20 of 28 PagelD.3080 <br /> to any existing building or premises used for residential (single-family or duplex) . <br /> . . uses."). As the Court has already explained at length, such "residential use" <br /> includes rentals of 30 days or longer. See Dkt. No. 31 at 15-19 (explaining that <br /> short-term rentals are residential in nature as the tenants use the properties for <br /> ordinary living activities). Therefore, HRS § 46-4(a)'s amortization exception is <br /> inapplicable in every zone which Ordinance 22-7 purports to regulate. <br /> Finally, in what appears to be a last-ditch effort to save Ordinance 22-7 from <br /> preemption, the City argues that the Ordinance does not truly conflict with HRS <br /> § 464(a), as ROH § 21-4.110 permits preexisting 30-89 day rentals to continue as <br /> nonconforming uses16 subject to reasonable restrictions. Dkt. No. 72 at 16-22. In <br /> other words, the City, again for the first time, argues that Ordinance 22-7 does not <br /> need a grandfathering provision because Honolulu, in effect, already has one. <br /> ROH § 21-4.110 provides: <br /> Constraints are placed on nonconformities to facilitate eventual conformity <br /> with this chapter. . . . Nonconforming . . . uses . . . may be continued, <br /> subject to the following provisions. <br /> (c)(2) Any nonconforming use that is discontinued for any reason for 12 <br /> consecutive months, or for 18 months during any three-year period, may not <br /> be resumed; provided that a temporary cessation of the nonconforming use <br /> 16Under the LUO, a"nonconforming use"is "[a]ny use of a structure or a zoning lot that was <br /> previously lawful, but does not conform to the applicable use regulations of the district where the <br /> lot is located . . . as a result of any subsequent amendment to this chapter, or a zoning map <br /> amendment." ROH § 21-10.1. <br /> - 20 - <br />