My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2026-05-08 COH-Planning Director Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Standing (PL-BOA-2025-000119)
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Board of Appeals
>
Pending Petitions for Next Hearing Date
>
zCases for Past Hearings
>
PL-BOA-2025-000119 Rohr (PD)
>
2026-05-08 COH-Planning Director Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Standing (PL-BOA-2025-000119)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2026 12:16:15 PM
Creation date
5/12/2026 12:16:11 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Standing also requires that the injury be within the "zone of interests"protected or <br /> regulated by the relevant statute. Life of the Land, 63 Haw. at 173, 623 P.2d at 439. The <br /> Director's determination was made pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes Chapter 205A, which <br /> focuses on: <br /> 1. protecting shoreline environmental resources; and <br /> 2. ensuring public access to the shoreline. <br /> See, e.g., Haw. Rev. Stat. § 205A-2. <br /> Appellant's complaints regarding traffic, short-term vacation rentals, and non-conforming <br /> structures are irrelevant to SMA resource protection. Because these factors cannot legally form <br /> the basis of an SMA determination, the Board cannot grant the relief Appellant seeks. An injury <br /> that cannot be redressed by a favorable decision is fatal to standing. See Kia'i Wai O Wai'ale'ale <br /> u Bd. OfLand and Nat. Res., 157 Hawaii 303, 317, 576 P.3d 816, 831 (2025). <br /> D. Appellant's Procedural Non-Compliance <br /> Standing requirements ensure that the legal system is not weaponized to delay legitimate <br /> property improvements. Mr. Standke's project has been stalled for over a year due to Appellant's <br /> unsupported claims and failure to comply with the BOA Rules. Appellant has caused undue <br /> delay by her failure to comply not only with BOA Rules 8-2 but also 8-11(d)requiring notice to <br /> surrounding property owners. <br /> IV. CONCLUSION <br /> Appellant has failed to allege a specific, non-conjectural injury related to SMA criteria. <br /> Without standing, this Board lacks the jurisdiction to hear the appeal. The Director respectfully <br /> requests the Board dismiss the appeal in its entirety. <br /> 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.