2024-10-04 Planning Director Pre-Hearing Brief (PL-BOA-2024-000104 & 105)

Home

from the Ordinance's conditions." 1250 inquired about the applicability of Chapter 23 to the specific facts of this case. In compliance with the CARD case which allows consideration of "the applicability of some provisions of law [which] have not been brought into consideration," the Director addressed the applicability of a Chapter 23-variance to the dedication process while appropriately refusing to opine on the validity of Variance 10-027 and recognizing both the limited scope of his authority and also the jurisdictions of the DPW and the Council. See CARD, 114 Hawai`i at 194-95, 159 P.3d at 153-54. 3. The Director's Declaratory Rulings Related to the Review or Affirmance of the Development Agreement Are Not in Error 1250 argues that a number of its declaratory requests related to the Development Agreement, specifically request number 3 under"Dedication Requirements"and requests 3,4, and 6 under "Construction Standards" are in error because the Director responded to them by stating the following: This question seeks an interpretation of the Development Agreement but the Development Agreement is not a Department order. ROA #105 at 390. 1250 asserts that according to Mayor's Rule 1-8, the Development Agreement is the responsibility of the Planning Department and, therefore, the Director should have specifically responded to its declaratory requests pertaining to it. PRPP Rule 3-1(a) limits the Director's authority to"issue a declaratory order as to the applicability of any statutory provision, ordinance, or of any nile or order of the Director or the Department." The Development Agreement is an individual agreement negotiated between the County and the Original Developer pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes §46-124. It is neither a "statutory provision, ordinance, or rule or order of the Director or the Department." HRS §46-124 provides: 14