My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2024-06-20 PL-BOA-2024-000105 1250 OCEANSIDE, LLC. vs Planning Director PL-INT-2024-007099 Record on Appeal
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Board of Appeals
>
Pending Petitions for Next Hearing Date
>
zCases for Past Hearings
>
PL-BOA-2024-000105 1250 Oceanside, LLC (PD)
>
2024-06-20 PL-BOA-2024-000105 1250 OCEANSIDE, LLC. vs Planning Director PL-INT-2024-007099 Record on Appeal
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/26/2024 10:20:34 AM
Creation date
6/26/2024 9:16:32 AM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
1303
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
rs, <br /> Director's decision on a variance application other than by filing an appeal with the <br /> Board of Appeals within thirty days of the Planning Director's written decision on the <br /> variance application? <br /> 6. Did the Variance violate any statute, ordinance, rule, or order within the Planning <br /> Director's jurisdiction related to amending County rezoning ordinances? <br /> 7. Did the Variance violate any statute, ordinance, rule, or order within the Planning <br /> Director's jurisdiction related to amending development agreements? <br /> Dedication of the Haleki`i Extension. Coupe has asserted various allegations regarding <br /> the dedication of the Mauka Haleki'i Extension, including the effect of the Resolution No. 317- <br /> 12, authorizing the County to accept the dedication (the "Resolution"). Exhibit H. Accordingly, <br /> Petitioner requests declaratory rulings from the Planning Director on the following: <br /> 1. As of November 9, 2012, did any statute, ordinance, rule, or order within the Planning <br /> Director's jurisdiction require notice of the Resolution to be served on neighboring <br /> property owners? <br /> 2. Did adoption of the Resolution violate any statute, ordinance, rule, or order within the <br /> Planning Director's,jurisdiction related to amending rezoning ordinances? <br /> 3. Did adoption of the Resolution violate any statute, ordinance, rule, or order within the <br /> Planning Director's jurisdiction related to amending development agreements? <br /> VII. JURISDICTION AND LEGAL STANDARD. <br /> HRS § 91-8 provides that"[a]ny interested person may petition an agency for a <br /> declaratory order as to the applicability of any statutory provision or of any rule or order of the <br /> agency." Consistent with this, PD Rule 3-I(a) authorizes the Planning Director"to issue a <br /> declaratory order as to the applicability of any statutory provision,ordinance,or of any rule or <br /> order of the Director or the [Planning] Department." HRS § 91-8 and PD Rule 3-1 are"designed <br /> to provide a means for securing from an agency its interpretation of relevant statutes, rules and <br /> orders." See In re United Pub. Workers, AFSCME, Local 646, AFL-C10, Union, 131 Hawaii <br /> 142, 152, 315 P.3d 768, 778 (Ct. App. 2013), as corrected (Feb. 21, 2014). <br /> 4862-5574-8005.3.051730-00058 -15- <br /> 19 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.