My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2025-08-18 3CCV-25-0000025 Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order Vacating and Remanding to BOA (PL-BOA-2024-000104)
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Board of Appeals
>
Pending Petitions for Next Hearing Date
>
zCases for Past Hearings
>
PL-BOA-2024-000104 1250 Oceanside, LLC (PD)
>
2025-08-18 3CCV-25-0000025 Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order Vacating and Remanding to BOA (PL-BOA-2024-000104)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/5/2025 2:01:03 PM
Creation date
1/23/2026 10:29:43 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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
• 1) Determine whether the Planning Director has the authority to determine <br /> — under the HRS, Hawaii Charter, County Code, and the Development <br /> Agreement—whether Oceanside is currently in compliance with the terms <br /> of the Development Agreement. <br /> • 2) Determine whether the Planning Director has the authority — under <br /> HRS, Hawaii Charter, County Code, and Development Agreement—to <br /> determine material breaches of the Development Agreement. <br /> • 3) Determine which county official, if any, has the power to excuse a <br /> breach of the Development Agreement. <br /> • 4) Whether Oceanside has, within the timeframe allotted, completed the <br /> following: a) designed and constructed/built the roads required under the <br /> Development Agreement and Incorporated Ordinances; and b) dedicated <br /> the roads required under the Development Agreement and Incorporated <br /> Ordinances. <br /> • 5) Whether Resolution No. 317-12 ("Resolution") and the Variance 10-027 <br /> ("Variance") improperly amended the Development Agreement and <br /> Incorporated Ordinances. <br /> • 6) Whether Variance is unlawful, impermissible, and not authorized under <br /> Hawaii law. <br /> • 7) Whether Petitioner received notice of the Variance, as required under <br /> the express dictate of County law. <br /> 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.