My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2025-09-11 Proof of Service to the Director
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Board of Appeals
>
Pending Petitions for Next Hearing Date
>
zCases for Future Hearings
>
PL-BOA-2025-000125 Kona Plantation LLC
>
2025-09-11 Proof of Service to the Director
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/15/2025 8:00:10 AM
Creation date
9/15/2025 7:59:36 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
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
hawaii lawyer.com® <br /> DAMON KEY LEONG KUPCHAK HASTERT <br /> A LAW CORPORATION <br /> Kona Plantation, LLC <br /> September 11, 2025 <br /> Page 5 <br /> Finally, the 2008 Settlement, unlike the 2004 Settlement, does not restrict the Owner from <br /> maintaining a website for the Property, nor does it prohibit the use of the Property for short-term <br /> accommodations. Because the 2008 Settlement superseded and replaced the 2004 Settlement, it is <br /> unlawful to now hold Owners responsible for adhering to terms within the 2004 Settlement. <br /> Thus, because the 2008 Settlement is the controlling agreement between the Owner and <br /> the County, and because the Owner has strictly adhered to the terms within the 2008 Settlement, <br /> the NOVO's allegation that the Owner has breached its settlement obligations is clearly erroneous <br /> and unlawful. <br /> 2. Owner has not Violated the Additional Farm Dwelling Agreement. <br /> Likewise, the Additional Farm Dwelling Agreement (recorded January 19, 2000) governing <br /> Unit B has also not been violated. As stated above, Owner and Adrew Bergey (the individuals who <br /> reside in Unit B)"actively engage[] in agricultural or farm-related activit[ies]"while staying at the <br /> Property, and are therefore lawfully permitted to reside in Unit B. <br /> 3. Owner has not Violated County Code. <br /> The NOVO erroneously alleges that (1) Owner "established 16 additional dwelling units <br /> without executing the required farm dwelling agreement or providing the necessary supporting <br /> documentation for agricultural activity",(2)that"alterations to create 16 dwelling units were made <br /> without the required Special Management Area permit,"and(3)the Property was being advertised <br /> for event use. <br /> a. 16 Dwelling Units do not Exist on the Property, and all Bedrooms were Lawfully <br /> Established. <br /> The NOVO erroneously claims that the Owner established "multiple dwelling units" on the <br /> Property by equipping the bedrooms with "independent heating elements." This allegation is <br /> completely erroneous. <br /> HCC Section 25-1-5 defines a "dwelling unit" as "one or more rooms designed for or <br /> containing or used as the complete facilities for the cooking, sleeping and living area of a single- <br /> family only and occupied by no more than one family and containing a single kitchen." The HCC <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.