Laserfiche WebLink
In his response to Petitioner's multiple inquiries, on October 23, 2006, the Planning <br /> Director sent a letter to Petitioner, see Exhibit `B", where he said that the Planning Department <br /> purportedly recognized five lots on the 48.47 acre parcel on May 22, 2000, but only recognized <br /> two lots there on June 2, 2004. The Planning Director called the June 2, 2004 letter "a mistake, <br /> because the Department should have respected the previous determination." <br /> Moving to the subdivided parcels,the Planning Director further explained that"there was <br /> a mistake in the approval of that subdivision [SUB 05-00064]" because of the failure to account <br /> for the noncontiguous lot: <br /> As Mr. Kellberg correctly points out, there was a mistake in the approval of that <br /> subdivision. One of the six recognized lots was a 0.699 acre portion of Grant 11,070. For <br /> some reason, it was not contiguous with the remainder of TMK No. 3-2-2-35. In the <br /> consolidation/resubdivision, the Planning Department did not notice that this <br /> noncontiguous portion had[not]been included in the lot count. Thus,it remained separate, <br /> and is now TMK No. 3-2-2-110. Thus, with the six lots in Sub. 05-00064 and parcel 110, <br /> there are now seven lots instead of six. <br /> Exhibit"B". <br /> The Planning Director continued: <br /> I am not going to do anything to undo this situation at this time. Sub.05-00064 has received <br /> final subdivision approval and at least some of the lots have been sold. Given that parcel <br /> 110 is physically separated from the remainder of Sub. 05-00064, and from any property <br /> owned by the subdivider, I cannot see a way to erase its separate existence. <br /> Exhibit`B". <br /> On February 6, 2007,Petitioner asked the Planning Director to apply Hawaii County Code <br /> 23-74(c)to SUB 05-00064 to correct the mistake. The Planning Director did not respond. <br /> Later, in a litigation interrogatory response,the Planning Director stated that <br /> SUB 05-00064 did not satisfy the requirements and standards of the Subdivision Control Code. <br /> Exhibit"C". <br /> 4 <br /> 7 <br />