Laserfiche WebLink
in the event of a subsequent court reversal.13 In addition, an owner who obtains a permit and begins <br /> construction before the expiration of an appeal period proceeds at his own risk.14 <br /> 36. Oceanside has a vested right to use the Iand for agriculture. It has no vested right to <br /> build luxury residences in the guise of"farm dwellings,"or to operate an urban resort development <br /> on Agricultural lands. <br /> 37. Because both its rezoning and subdivision approvals are defective, Oceanside's <br /> reliance on its prior subdivision approval to assert a defense of either vested rights or equitable <br /> estoppel for its planned"agricultural"subdivision must fail,and the County cannot ignore its <br /> enforcement duties under HRS § 205-12. <br /> Failure to Act in Good Faith. <br /> 38. The elements of an equitable estoppel defense are: "(1)that a party, acting in goo <br /> faith, (2)on a$irmative acts of a municipal corporation, (3)makes expensive and permanent <br /> improvements in reliance thereon, and(4)the equities strongly favor the party seeking to invoke the <br /> doctrine."" <br /> 39. "Me developer's conduct is scrutinized for good faith attempts to comply with all <br /> the legal requirements known to him.1116 <br /> 40. In Life of the Land v City Council, 60 Haw. 446, 592 P.2d 26(1979), the Hawaii <br /> Supreme Court held that where a developer, in good faith reliance upon existing law,has expended <br /> substantial sums of money for the preparation of plans and documents for the purpose of applying <br /> for a building permit, the county will be equitably estopped from denying him a building permit <br /> based on a subsequently enacted ordinance. <br /> 13 35 Amlur POF 3d.3385, § 14,citing O'Donnell v Bassler.2 <br /> proceeding 56 Md App 507,468 A2d 383,cent. den. 299 Md 426,474 A2d 2djq 01,425 A2d 1003(1981), later <br /> City of Hagerstown,264 Md.at 4%,287 A.2d at 250;Lipsitz, 164 Md.at 225-28, 164 A.at 745-46. <br /> is <br /> 646. April 5,2002 Order,Conclusion of Law No. 18,citing Miller v.Bd.of Adi.of Dew�ey Beach 521 A.2d at <br /> " Dorothy o ( )(citing y m,supra,6 U.Haw.L.Rev.at 444 1984 citin C. Siemon, W.Larson and D.Portor,Vested <br /> Rights:Balancing Public and Private Development Expectations(Urban Land Institute 1982)). <br /> 23 <br />